DOCSLIB.ORG

Offenses Merge Theory Cases Attempted Robbery Merges Yes Blockburger Newton V

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Offenses Merge Theory Cases Attempted Robbery Merges Yes Blockburger Newton V Offenses Merge Theory Cases Attempted Robbery merges Yes Blockburger Newton v. State, 280 Md. 260, into Felony Murder White v. State, 300 Md. 719, Robbery w/ deadly weapon Yes Blockburger Humphrey v. State 39 Md. App. merges into Felony Murder 484, Carlton v. State, 111 Md. App. 436, Frye v. State, 37 Md. App. 476 Attempted Robbery w/ Yes Blockburger Higginbotham v. State 104 Md. dangerous & deadly weapon App. 145 merges into Felony Murder Battery merges into Felony Yes Blockburger Oliver v. State, 53 Md. App. 490 Murder Robbery merges into Armed Yes Blockburger Gerald v. State 299 Md. 138 , Robbery Sweetwine v. State 42 Md. App. 1, Souffie v. State 50 Md. App. 547, Thompson v. State, 119 Md. App. 606 Assault merges into Assault w/ Yes Blockburger Simms v. State 288 Md. 712, intent to rob. Manigualt v. State, 61 Md. App. 271 Assault merges into Robbery Yes Blockburger Snowden v. State 321 Md. 612 1st Degree Assault merges into Yes Blockburger Gerald v. State, 137 Md. App. Robbery 295 1st Degree Assault merges into Yes Blockburger Thompson v. State, 119 Md. Armed robbery App. 606 Felony Theft merges into Yes Lenity Spitzinger v. State, 340 Md. 114 Robbery Attempted Robbery merges Yes Blockburger State v. Taylor 329 Md. 671 into Assault w/ intent to rob Assault w/ intent to Rob Yes Blockburger Rose v. State 37 Md. App. 388 merged into Robbery Robbery w/ deadly weapon No Couplin v. State 37 Md. App. and Use of handgun in 567 commission of a crime of violence Assault w/ intent to rob and No Irby v. State, 66 Md. App. 580 Attempted Robbery w/ deadly weapon Assault w/ intent to murder and No Johnson v. State, 56 Md. App. Attempted Armed Robbery 205 Conspiracy to rob and No Wooten-Bey v. State, 76 Md. Attempted Robbery w/ App. 603 dangerous weapon Wearing or Carrying concealed No Selby v. State, 76 Md. App. 201 weapon w/ intent to injure and Robbery w/ dang. or deadly weapon Robbery w/ a dang. and deadly No Whack v. State, 288 Md. 137, weapon and Use of a handgun Stevenson v. State, 43 Md. App. in commission of a felony 120 Robbery w/ dang. and deadly No Frye v. State, 37 Md. App. 476 weapon and Premeditated 1st Degree Murder Carrying dangerous Weapon Yes Lenity Somers v. State, 156 Md. App. w/ intent to injure merges into 279 Robbery w/ dangerous weapon Battery merges into Robbery Yes Blockburger Snowden v. State 321 Md. 612, Adams v. State, 86 Md. App. 377 Battery merges into Murder Yes Blockburger Souffie v. State 50 Md. App. 547 Battery merges into Rape Yes Blockburger Dyson v. State 89, Md. App. 651 Assault by threat does not No Lamb v. State 93 Md. App. 422 merge into battery Battery merges into False Yes Blockburger Lamb v. State 93 Md. App. 422 Imprisonment Battery merges into 4th Degree Yes Blockburger Cortez v. State, 104 Md. App. Sex Offense 358 Battery merges into 3rd Degree Yes Blockburger Biggus v. State, 323 Md. 339 sex offense Battery merges into Assault w/ Yes Blockburger Claggett v. State, 108 Md. App. intent to prevent lawful 32 apprehension Battery merges into Affray Yes Blockburger Lewis v. State, 289 Md. 1 Theft over $300 merges into Yes Lenity Jackson v. State, 141 Md. App. Robbery 175 Theft over $300 merges into Yes Lenity Bellamy v. State, 119 Md. App. Robbery w/ deadly weapon 296 Misdemeanor Theft merges Yes Blockburger Younger v. State, 94 Md. App. into Felony theft. 644 Theft merges into storehouse Yes Blockburger Goines v. State 89 Md. App. breaking and stealing 104, Warfield v. State, 76 Md. App. 141 Theft does not merge into No Legislative Price v. State, 111 Md. App. 487 carjacking Intent False pretenses merges into Yes Blockburger Johnson v. State, 283 Md. 196 Welfare Fraud Assault merges into Affray Yes Blockburger Lewis v. State, 289 Md. 1 1st Degree Assault merged into Yes Blockburger Sifrit v. State 383 Md. 116 2nd Degree Murder 2nd Degree assault merges into Yes Blockburger Cooper v. State, 128 Md. App. Resisting Arrest 257 Simple assault merges into Yes Blockburger Johnson v. State 310 Md. 681, Assault w/ intent to maim Jenkins v. State 59 Md. App. 612 Assault by threat does not No Lamb v. State 93 Md. App. 422 merge into battery Assault merges into 2nd degree Yes Blockburger State v. Allewalt 308 Md. 89, Rape Dyson v. State 89, Md. App. 651 Assault merges into attempted Yes Blockburger Walker v. State 53 Md. App. 171 rape when the assault is also the overt act of the attempt Assault w/ intent to murder and No Brooks v. State, 284 Md. 416 carrying a weapon openly w/ intent to injure Battery merges into Assault w/ Yes Blockburger Claggett v. State, 108 Md. App. intent to prevent lawful 32 apprehension 3rd degree sex offense and No Dillsworth v. State 308 Md. 354 assault w/ intent to maim Assault w/ intent to maim Yes Lenity State v. Jenkins 307 Md. 501 merges into Assault w/ intent to murder 1st Degree Assault (when Yes Blockburger Dixon v. State, 364 Md. 209 intentionally causing or attempting to cause serious physical injury) merges into attempted voluntary manslaughter Reckless Endangerment Yes Blockburger Williams v. State, 100 Md. App. merges into Assault w/ intent 468 to maim Larceny merges into Yes Blockburger Slye v. State 42 Md. App. 520 Shoplifting Unlawful taking of Motor Yes Lenity McGrath v. State, 356 Md. 20 Vehicle merges into Theft under $300 Fraudulent misappropriation Yes Lenity White v. State, 100 Md. App. 1 by fiduciary merges into theft over $300 Unauthorized Use merges into Yes Blockburger Allen v. State, 157 Md. App. 177 Theft over $500 Embezzlement by fiduciary Yes Lenity State v. Burroughs 333 Md. 614 merges into theft by deception Possession of Marijuana Yes Blockburger Mauk v. State, 91 Md. App. 456 merges into Possession w/ intent to distribute marijuana Possession w/ intent to Yes Blockburger Hankins v. State, 80 Md. App. distribute merges into 647, Manuel v. State 85 Md. distribution App. 1, Hawkins v. State, 77 Md. App. 338 Possession w/ intent to Yes Blockburger Simpson v. State, 121 Md. App. distribute merges into 263 Possession w/ intent to distribute 28 grams Unlawful Distribution of LSD Yes Blockburger Anderson v. State, 89 Md. App. merged into Distribution of 712 1,000 dosage units of LSD Conspiracy to distribute No Wadlow v. State 335 Md. 122 cocaine and Possession w/ intent to distribute cocaine Possession w/ intent to No Spiering v. State 58 Md. App. 1 distribute CDS and Manufacturing CDS Conspiracy to distribute No Murray v. State, 89 Md. App. cocaine and Distribution of 626, Harris v. State, 82 Md. App. Cocaine 450, Cooper v. State, 128 Md. App. 257 Manufacturing drugs and No Baldwin v. State, 56 Md. App. possessing drugs sufficient to 529 indicate manufacture or dispensing, and making it unlawful to maintain premises to use, make or store drugs. Use of firearm in relation to No Johnson v. State, 154 Md. App. drug trafficking and 286 Wear/Carry/Transport handgun False Imprisonment merges Yes Blockburger Testerman v. State, 61 Md. App. into Rape 257 Unnatural or perverted sexual Yes Blockburger State v. Lancaster 332 Md. 385 practice merges w/ 4th degree sex offense 1st Degree Burglary merges Yes Blockburger Utter v. State, 139 Md. App. 43 into 1st Degree Attempted Rape Battery merges into Rape Yes Blockburger Dyson v. State 89, Md. App. 651 Battery merges into 3rd Degree Yes Blockburger Biggus v. State, 323 Md. 339 sex offense Battery merges into 4th Degree Yes Blockburger Cortez v. State, 104 Md. App. Sex Offense 358 3rd degree sex offense and No Dillsworth v. State 308 Md. 354 assault w/ intent to maim 4th Degree Burglary and 2nd No Fenwick v. State, 135 Md. App. Degree Rape 167 Carrying dangerous weapon No Biggus v. State, 323 Md. 339 and 3rd Degree Sex Offense Carring weapon openly w/ No Nance v. State, 77 Md. App. 259 intent to injure and 1st Degree Rape and 1st Degree Sex Offense 2nd Degree Rape and Incest No Smith v. State, 62 Md. App. 670 Carrying weapon openly w/ No Burkett v. State, 98 Md. App. intent to injure and 2nd Degree 459 sex offense Assault merges into 2nd degree Yes Blockburger State v. Allewalt 308 Md. 89, Rape Dyson v. State 89, Md. App. 651 Child Abuse and any No Legislative Rutherford v. State, 2004 WL underlying sexual offenses Intent 2965849 (Md. App.) Assault merges into attempted Yes Blockburger Walker v. State 53 Md. App. 171 rape when the assault is also the overt act of the attempt Rape and Sex offense and No Rutherford v. State, 2004 WL Child Abuse 2965849 Use of firearm in relation to No Johnson v. State, 154 Md. App. drug trafficking and 286 Wear/Carry/Transport handgun Unlawfully carrying handgun No Johnson v. State, 67 Md. App. and Poss. of handgun by one 347 previously convicted of crime of violence Robbery w/ a dang. and deadly No Whack v. State, 288 Md. 137, weapon and Use of a handgun Stevenson v. State, 43 Md. App. in commission of a felony 120 Assault w/ intent to murder and Yes Lenity Green v. State, 79 Md. App. 506 Assault w/ intent to avoid apprehension merge into attempted murder Assault w/ intent to murder Yes Lenity Smallwood v. State, 106 Md. merges into attempted 2nd App. 1 Degree Murder Assault w/ intent to Murder Yes Lenity Williams v. State, 323 Md.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Charging Language
    1. TABLE OF CONTENTS Abduction ................................................................................................73 By Relative.........................................................................................415-420 See Kidnapping Abuse, Animal ...............................................................................................358-362,365-368 Abuse, Child ................................................................................................74-77 Abuse, Vulnerable Adult ...............................................................................78,79 Accessory After The Fact ..............................................................................38 Adultery ................................................................................................357 Aircraft Explosive............................................................................................455 Alcohol AWOL Machine.................................................................................19,20 Retail/Retail Dealer ............................................................................14-18 Tax ................................................................................................20-21 Intoxicated – Endanger ......................................................................19 Disturbance .......................................................................................19 Drinking – Prohibited Places .............................................................17-20 Minors – Citation Only
    [Show full text]
  • Reckless Driving; Vehicular Manslaughter; Death of Two Or More) Penal Law § 125.14 (4) (Committed on Or After Nov
    AGGRAVATED VEHICULAR HOMICIDE (Reckless Driving; Vehicular Manslaughter; Death of Two or More) Penal Law § 125.14 (4) (Committed on or after Nov. 1, 2007) The (specify) count is Aggravated Vehicular Homicide. Under our law, a person is guilty of Aggravated Vehicular Homicide when he or she engages in Reckless Driving1 and commits the crime of Vehicular Manslaughter in the Second Degree2 and causes the death of more than one 3 person. The following terms used in that definition have a special meaning: A person ENGAGES IN RECKLESS DRIVING when that person drives or uses any motor vehicle,4 in a manner which unreasonably interferes with the free and proper use of a public highway, road, street, or avenue, or unreasonably endangers users of a public highway, road, street, or avenue.5 1 At this point, the statute continues: “as defined by section twelve hundred twelve of the vehicle and traffic law.” That definition is utilized in this charge in the definition of “reckless driving.” 2 At this point, the statute continues: “as defined in section 125.12 of this article.” 3 At this point, the statute states “other person.” For purposes of clarity, the word “other” modifying “person” has been omitted. 4 At this point, the statute continues: “motorcycle or any other vehicle propelled by any power other than a muscular power or any appliance or accessory thereof.” (Vehicle & Traffic Law § 1212). Such language has been omitted here due to the all encompassing term “motor vehicle.” The additional statutory language should, however, be inserted if that type of vehicle is at issue.
    [Show full text]
  • CRIMINAL SOLICITATION THIRD DEGREE (Solicits Felony and Person Solicited Under 16) PENAL LAW 100.08 (Committed on Or After Sept
    CRIMINAL SOLICITATION THIRD DEGREE (Solicits felony and person solicited under 16) PENAL LAW 100.08 (Committed on or after Sept. 1, 1978) The (specify) count is Criminal Solicitation in the Third Degree. Under our law, a person is guilty of Criminal Solicitation in the Third Degree when, being over eighteen years of age, with intent that another person under sixteen years of age engage in conduct that would constitute a felony, he or she solicits, requests, commands, importunes or otherwise attempts to cause such other person to engage in such conduct. The following term used in that definition has a special meaning: INTENT means conscious objective or purpose.1 Thus, a person acts with the intent that another person under sixteen years of age engage in conduct that would constitute a felony when his or her conscious objective or purpose is that such other person engage in such conduct. Under our law, (specify the solicited felony) is a felony. A person is guilty of (specify the solicited felony), when (read the applicable portion of the statutory definition of the solicited felony). Under our law, it is no defense to a prosecution for criminal solicitation that the person solicited could not be guilty of the crime solicited owing to criminal irresponsibility or other legal incapacity or exemption, or to unawareness of the criminal nature of the conduct solicited or of the defendant's criminal purpose or to other factors precluding the mental state required for the 1 See Penal Law § 15.05(1). If necessary, an expanded definition of “intent” is available in the section on Instructions of General Applicability under Culpable Mental States.
    [Show full text]
  • What's Reasonable?: Self-Defense and Mistake in Criminal and Tort
    Do Not Delete 12/15/2010 10:20 PM WHAT’S REASONABLE?: SELF-DEFENSE AND MISTAKE IN CRIMINAL AND TORT LAW by Caroline Forell∗ In this Article, Professor Forell examines the criminal and tort mistake- as-to-self-defense doctrines. She uses the State v. Peairs criminal and Hattori v. Peairs tort mistaken self-defense cases to illustrate why application of the reasonable person standard to the same set of facts in two areas of law can lead to different outcomes. She also uses these cases to highlight how fundamentally different the perception of what is reasonable can be in different cultures. She then questions whether both criminal and tort law should continue to treat a reasonably mistaken belief that deadly force is necessary as justifiable self-defense. Based on the different purposes that tort and criminal law serve, Professor Forell explains why in self-defense cases criminal law should retain the reasonable mistake standard while tort law should move to a strict liability with comparative fault standard. I. INTRODUCTION ....................................................................... 1402 II. THE LAW OF SELF-DEFENSE ................................................... 1403 III. THE PEAIRS MISTAKE CASES .................................................. 1406 A. The Peairs Facts ..................................................................... 1408 B. The Criminal Case .................................................................. 1409 1. The Applicable Law ........................................................... 1409
    [Show full text]
  • Evidence in Criminal Proceedings Hearsay and Related Topics
    Criminal Law EVIDENCE IN CRIMINAL PROCEEDINGS: HEARSAY AND RELATED TOPICS A Consultation Paper LAW COMMISSION CONSULTATION PAPER No 138 The Law Commission was set up by section 1 of the Law Commissions Act 1965 for the purpose of promoting the reform of the law. The Law Commissioners are: The Honourable Mr Justice Brooke, Chairman Professor Andrew Burrows Miss Diana Faber Mr Charles Harpum Mr Stephen Silber, QC The Secretary of the Law Commission is Mr Michael Sayers and its offices are at Conquest House, 37-38 John Street, Theobalds Road, London WClN 2BQ. This Consultation Paper, completed for publication on 11 May 1995, is circulated for comment and criticism only. It does not represent the final views of the Law Commission. The Law Commission would be grateful for comments on this Consultation Paper before 31 October 1995. All correspondence should be addressed to: Ms C Hughes Law Commission Conquest House 37-38 John Street Theobalds Road London WClN 2BQ (Tel: 0171- 453 1232) (Fax: 0171- 453 1297) It may be helpful for the Law Commission, either in discussion with others concerned or in any subsequent recommendations, to be able to refer to and attribute comments submitted in response to this Consultation Paper. Any request to treat all, or part, of a response in confidence will, of course, be respected, but if no such request is made the Law Commission will assume that the response is not intended to be confidential. The Law Commission Consultation Paper No 138 Criminal Law EVIDENCE IN CRIMINAL PROCEEDINGS: HEARSAY AND RELATED TOPICS
    [Show full text]
  • Casenotes: Criminal Law—Homicide—Felony-Murder—Felon Is
    University of Baltimore Law Review Volume 9 Article 9 Issue 3 Spring 1980 1980 Casenotes: Criminal Law — Homicide — Felony- Murder — Felon Is Culpable for Murder in the First Degree under Maryland's Felony-Murder Statute When Police Officer Kills Kidnapped Hostage Used by Felon as Human Shield. Jackson v. State, 286 Md. 430, 408 A.2d 711 (1979) John A. Roberts University of Baltimore School of Law Follow this and additional works at: http://scholarworks.law.ubalt.edu/ublr Part of the Law Commons Recommended Citation Roberts, John A. (1980) "Casenotes: Criminal Law — Homicide — Felony-Murder — Felon Is Culpable for Murder in the First Degree under Maryland's Felony-Murder Statute When Police Officer Kills Kidnapped Hostage Used by Felon as Human Shield. Jackson v. State, 286 Md. 430, 408 A.2d 711 (1979)," University of Baltimore Law Review: Vol. 9: Iss. 3, Article 9. Available at: http://scholarworks.law.ubalt.edu/ublr/vol9/iss3/9 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by ScholarWorks@University of Baltimore School of Law. It has been accepted for inclusion in University of Baltimore Law Review by an authorized administrator of ScholarWorks@University of Baltimore School of Law. For more information, please contact [email protected]. CRIMINAL LAW - HOMICIDE - FELONY-MURDER - FELON IS CULPABLE FOR MURDER IN THE FIRST DEGREE UNDER MARYLAND'S FELONY-MURDER STATUTE WHEN POLICE OFFICER KILLS KIDNAPPED HOSTAGE USED BY FELON AS HUMAN SHIELD. JACKSON v. STATE, 286 Md. 430, 408 A.2d 711 (1979). At common law, when one commits homicide while perpetrating a felony, the felony-murder rule raises that homicide to murder.' In Maryland, when a person commits murder in the perpetration of one or more statutorily-enumerated felonies, that murder is in the first degree under the state's felony-murder statute.2 Maryland courts have readily applied this statute when the felon has struck the fatal blow.' Recently, in Jackson v.
    [Show full text]
  • Lifetime Likelihood of Victimization
    U. S. Department of Justice I Bureau of Justice Statistics I Lifetime Likelihood of Victimization by Herbert Koppel people's perception of the meaning of BJS Analyst March 1987 annual rates with respect to their own The Bureau of Justice Statistics lives. If the Earth revolved around the This report provides estimates of the National Crime Survey provides sun in 180 days, all of our annual crime likelihood that a person will become a annual victimization rates based rates would be halved, but we would not victim of crime during his or her life- on counts of the number of crimes be safer. time, or that a household will be vic- reported and not reported to timized during a 20-year period. This police in the United States. These Calculating lifetime victimization rates contrasts with the conventional use of a rates are based on interviews 1-year period in measuring crime and twice a year with about 101,000 For this report, lifetime likelihoods criminal victimization. Most promi- persons in approximately 49,000 of victimization were calculated from nently, the National Crime Survey nationally representative NCS annual victimization rates and life (NCS) surveys a sample of U.S. house- households. Those annual rates, tables published by the National Center holds and publishes annual victimization while of obvious utility to for Health statistics.% The probability rates, and the FBI's Uniform Crime policymakers, researchers, and that a person will be victimized at a Reports (UCR) provide annual rates of statisticians, do not convey to particular age basically depends upon crimes reported to the police.
    [Show full text]
  • Chapter 3-1 Homicide and Related Offenses
    CHAPTER 3-1 HOMICIDE AND RELATED OFFENSES 3-1:01 MURDER IN THE FIRST DEGREE (AFTER DELIBERATION) 3-1:02 MURDER IN THE FIRST DEGREE (FELONY MURDER) 3-1:03 AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE FELONY MURDER 3-1:04 MURDER IN THE FIRST DEGREE (EXECUTION BASED UPON PERJURY) 3-1:05 MURDER IN THE FIRST DEGREE (EXTREME INDIFFERENCE) 3-1:06 MURDER IN THE FIRST DEGREE (DISTRIBUTION OF CONTROLLED SUBSTANCE ON SCHOOL GROUNDS) 3-1:07 MURDER IN THE FIRST DEGREE (CHILD UNDER TWELVE) 3-1:08 MURDER IN THE SECOND DEGREE 3-1:09 INTERROGATORY (PROVOKED PASSION) 3-1:10 MANSLAUGHTER (RECKLESS) 3-1:11 MANSLAUGHTER (CAUSED OR AIDED SUICIDE) 3-1:12 CRIMINALLY NEGLIGENT HOMICIDE 3-1:13 VEHICULAR HOMICIDE 3-1:14 SPECIAL INSTRUCTION INFERENCES TO BE DRAWN FROM EVIDENCE OF BLOOD ALCOHOL LEVEL 3-1(15) DEFINITION The instructions in this chapter are designed to cover the offenses in §§ 18-3-101 to 107, C.R.S. 3-1:01 MURDER IN THE FIRST DEGREE (AFTER DELIBERATION) The elements of the crime of murder in the first degree are: 1. That the defendant, 2. in the State of Colorado, at or about the date and place charged, 3. after deliberation, and with intent a. to cause the death of a person other than himself, b. caused the death of __________________. 4. [without the affirmative defense in instruction number _____ .] After considering all the evidence, if you decide the prosecution has proven each of the elements beyond a reasonable doubt, you should find the defendant guilty of murder in the first degree.
    [Show full text]
  • Arkansas Sentencing Commission Pursuant to A
    Arkansas Impact Assessment for HB1577 Sentencing Sponsored by Representative Hammer Commission Subtitle CONCERNING THE OFFENSE OF ARSON; AND CONCERNING THE STATUTE OF LIMITATIONS FOR ARSON. Impact Summary1 Minimal, affecting fewer than ten offenders per year. Change from current law2 Amends Arkansas Code Annotated § 5-38-301, Arson, by adding a new course of conduct by which a person can commit this offense. Under the proposed bill, a person commits arson if he or she starts a fire or causes an explosion with the purpose of destroying or otherwise damaging an area of real property being used for the commercial growth of timber or other agricultural product if the timber or other agricultural produced is destroyed or made commercially non-viable and the value of the destroyed or commercially non-viable timber or other agricultural product is more than five thousand dollars ($5,000). The other courses of conduct constituting arson remain intact. Under the proposed bill, this new course of conduct would constitute a Class B felony. See attached for a copy of A.C.A. § 5-38-301, as currently written. The proposed bill also amends the statute of limitations for arson. Under current law, A.C.A. § 5-1-109, the statute of limitations for arson is either: one (1) year (for misdemeanors), three (3) years (for Class B, C, and D felonies), or six (6) years (for Class Y and A felonies). The proposed bill would extend the statute of limitations to ten (10) years if the arson was committed by burning an area of real property being used for the growth of timber or other agricultural product and rendering more than five thousand dollars ($5,000) worth of timber or other agricultural product destroyed or commercially nonviable.
    [Show full text]
  • A Clarification of the Law of Attempted Murder in Illinois - People V
    DePaul Law Review Volume 28 Issue 1 Fall 1978 Article 9 Specific Intent Made More Specific: A Clarification of the Law of Attempted Murder in Illinois - People v. Harris Nancy Lea Barrett Follow this and additional works at: https://via.library.depaul.edu/law-review Recommended Citation Nancy L. Barrett, Specific Intent Made More Specific: A Clarification of the Law ofttempted A Murder in Illinois - People v. Harris , 28 DePaul L. Rev. 157 (1978) Available at: https://via.library.depaul.edu/law-review/vol28/iss1/9 This Notes is brought to you for free and open access by the College of Law at Via Sapientiae. It has been accepted for inclusion in DePaul Law Review by an authorized editor of Via Sapientiae. For more information, please contact [email protected]. SPECIFIC INTENT MADE MORE SPECIFIC: A CLARIFICATION OF THE LAW OF ATTEMPTED MURDER IN ILLINOIS -PEOPLE V. HARRIS The essence of the crime of attempted murder is a specific intent to take life. 1 This concept has undergone a subtle but significant change in Illinois law. In a recent decision, the Illinois Supreme Court has sought to define the precise mental element necessary to sustain a conviction of attempted murder. In People v. Harris,2 the court held that "to convict for attempted murder nothing less than a criminal intent to kill must be shown. "3 The significance of this seemingly straightforward holding can be better ap- preciated in light of prior Illinois decisions, many of which have sanctioned attempted murder charges based on something less than intent to cause 4 death.
    [Show full text]
  • Have You Been the Victim of Assault, Robbery, Harassment Or Some Other School-Related Crime?
    Have you been the victim of assault, robbery, harassment or some other school-related crime? If you have, are you: Housed at the UFT and staffed by your colleagues who ➤ Feeling vulnerable, anxious, fearful, angry or understand your school environment and both the pressures depressed? and satisfactions of your job, the Victim Support Program is the only one of its kind in the country. Services include: ➤Confused about procedures and forms? ✓ Individual and group counseling conducted by Frustrated by the paperwork involved in securing your ➤ licensed psychologists, specially trained and medical benefits, claiming line-of-duty injury, or dealing with law enforcement or other agencies? experienced in working with people who are suffering trauma. ➤ Apprehensive about returning to work? ✓ Help with forms and procedures. Call the Victim Support Program. Assistance in dealing with the police department and The Victim Support Program was established in 1989 by ✓ the United Federation of Teachers and the New York City other criminal justice agencies. Board of Education to provide comprehensive, practical ✓ Support as we accompany you to court or the Board’s assistance and psychological support to teachers and other Medical Bureau. school personnel following crimes and violent incidents in Visits to schools following violent incidents to deal school. ✓ with “ripple effect” trauma. Our goal is to help you cope with the aftermath of a criminal incident. We will support you as you strive for recovery after what we know is often a professionally and personally traumatic event. Call us. We can help! (212) 598-6853 Monday-Friday, 10 a.m.- 6 p.m.
    [Show full text]
  • Individual Incident Entry (IIE)
    Individual Incident Entry (IIE) To begin entering a Group A or Group B incident into the state repository, click the “Incident / Arrest” button. Choose Incident or Arrest Click the “Incident Report” button to begin entering Group A incidents or click “Arrest Report” to begin enter Group B incidents into the repository. If you choose Group A, Incident …. Start with selecting either New Case or Get Previous Case Group A, New Case …. 1 2 After clicking on “New Case”: 1) enter the incident number in the box and 2) click “OK” – these steps are mandatory. Group A, Previous Case …. 1 2 After clicking “Get Previous Case”: 1) enter the incident number or partial number in the box and 2) click “Search”. Either one incident or a list of incidents with the partial number will display. Click the “Select” button to choose the appropriate case. Incident data elements …. Optional: Use only if incident date is Mandatory (if known): unknown Date incident occurred (MM/DD/YYYY) (MM/DD/YYYY) Mandatory: Use military 24-hour time; if incident occurs exactly at If an incident needs to be midnight, consider it to have removed from the repository, occurred at the beginning of the “delete” it here. following day. Optional: Physical address or Mandatory: Answer “no” or “yes” only for the latitude/longitude contribute to the offenses of: repository crime mapping feature. All Other Larceny Bribery Burglary/Breaking & Entering Credit Card/ATM Fraud Embezzlement Extortion/Blackmail False Pretenses/Swindle/Confidence Game (Fraud) Impersonation (Fraud) Motor Vehicle Theft Theft From A Building Theft from a Motor Vehicle Robbery Wire Fraud Victim data elements ….
    [Show full text]