DOCSLIB.ORG

Criminal Code of the Republic of Hungary

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Criminal Code of the Republic of Hungary Act C of 2012 on the Criminal Code1 With a view to protecting inviolable and inalienable human rights, to defending the independence and territorial integrity of the country, and to protecting the nation’s economic and financial interest, taking into account Hungary’s international legal commitments as well as European Union policies, in order to enforce the State’s exclusive jurisdiction in criminal matters, Parliament has adopted the following Act: GENERAL PART CHAPTER I BASIC PROVISIONS Principle of Legality Section 1 (1) Criminal liability may be established only in connection with a conduct that a legal instrument requires to be criminalized at the time when committed, with the exception of acts which are punishable under universally acknowledged rules of international law. (2) A penalty or measure may not be imposed for a criminal offense that was not criminalized by legal instrument at the time when committed, or - in the case provided for in Subsection (2) of Section 2 - at the time when adjudicated. CHAPTER II JURISDICTION IN CRIMINAL MATTERS Temporal Scope Section 2 (1) Subject to the exceptions set out in Subsections (2)-(3), criminal offenses shall be adjudicated under the criminal law in effect at the time when they were committed. (2) Where an act is no longer treated as a criminal offense, or if it draws a more lenient penalty under the new criminal law in effect at the time when it is adjudicated, this new law shall apply. 1 Promulgated on 13 July 2012. 1 (3) The new criminal law shall apply with retroactive effect in connection with acts which are punishable under universally acknowledged rules of international law, if such acts did not constitute a criminal offense under Hungarian criminal law at the time when they were committed. Territorial and Personal Scope Section 3 (1) Hungarian criminal law shall apply: a) to criminal offenses committed in Hungary; b) to criminal offenses committed on commercial ships or watercraft sailing, or aircraft flying under Hungarian flag outside the territory of Hungary; c) to any act of Hungarian citizens committed abroad, which are criminalized in accordance with Hungarian law. (2) Hungarian criminal law shall, furthermore, apply: a) to any act committed by non-Hungarian citizens abroad, if: aa) it is punishable as a criminal offense under Hungarian law and in accordance with the laws of the country where committed, ab) it is recognized as an offense against the State, excluding espionage against allied armed forces, regardless of whether or not it is punishable in accordance with the law of the country where committed, ac) it constitutes a criminal act under Chapter XIII or XIV, or any other criminal offenses which are to be prosecuted under international treaty ratified by an act of Parliament; b) to any act committed by non-Hungarian citizens abroad against a Hungarian national or against a legal person or unincorporated business association established under Hungarian law, which are punishable under Hungarian law. (3) In the cases described in Subsection (2) criminal proceedings are opened by order of the Prosecutor General. CHAPTER III CRIMINAL LIABILITY Criminal Offenses Section 4 (1) ‘Criminal offense’ means any conduct that is committed intentionally or - if negligence also carries a punishment - with negligence, and that is considered potentially harmful to society and that is punishable under this Act. (2) An ‘act harmful to society’ means any activity or passive negligence which prejudices or presents a risk to the person or rights of others, or the fundamental constitutional, economic or social structure of Hungary provided for in the Fundamental Law. Section 5 2 Criminal offences may be classified as felonies and misdemeanors. Felony is a crime committed intentionally which is punishable under this Act by imprisonment of two or more years. Every other criminal offense is a misdemeanor. Plurality of Offenses and Cumulative Offenses Section 6 (1) ‘Multiple counts of offenses’ means when one or more acts committed by the same person result in more than one crime and they are adjudicated in the same proceedings. (2)2 Multiple counts of offenses shall not cover a cumulative offense committed by a repetition of acts of the same kind, against the same victim, motivated by a single objective, and which may occur in brief intervals. Intent Section 7 A criminal offense is committed with intent if the person conceives a plan to achieve a certain result, or acquiesces to the consequences of his conduct. Negligence Section 8 ‘Negligence’ means when a criminal offense is committed where the perpetrator is able to anticipate the possible consequences of his conduct, but carelessly relies on their non-occurrence, or fails to foresee such possible consequences through conduct characterized by carelessness and neglectfulness. Responsibility for the Result as an Aggravating Circumstance Section 9 The more severe consequences attached to the result as a qualifying circumstance of the crime may be applied if the perpetrator is at least charged with negligence in respect of the result. Attempt Section 10 (1) Any person who carries out an act with intent to commit a premeditated crime, without finishing it, shall be punishable for attempt. (2) The sentence applicable to a completed criminal act shall also apply to attempt. 2 Enters into force as under Subsection (1) of Section 318 of Act CCXXIII of 2012. 3 (3) The penalty may be reduced without limitation or dismissed altogether if the attempt has been carried out on an unsuitable subject, with an unsuitable instrument or by way of unsuitable means. (4) Any person: a) who voluntarily withdraws from the completion of the criminal act, or b) who attempts to prevent the crime on his own volition, shall not be prosecuted for attempt. (5) If in the case provided for in Subsection (4) the attempt in itself constitutes another crime, the perpetrator shall be liable for prosecution for that crime. Preparation Section 11 (1) If it is expressly prescribed by this Act, any person who provides the means necessary for committing a criminal offense or facilitating that, and who invites, volunteers or undertakes to commit a crime, or agrees to commit a crime in league with others shall be punishable for preparation. (2) Any person: a) who voluntarily withdraws from the commencement of the criminal act, b) who withdraws his invitation, offer, undertaking with a view to avoiding the perpetration, or attempts to pursue other contributors to withdraw from the criminal activity, provided that the commencement of the perpetration of the criminal offense does not take place for any reason, or c) who reports to the authority the preparation before commencement of the perpetration of the criminal offense, shall not be prosecuted for preparation. (3)3 If in the case provided for in Subsection (2) the preparation in itself constitutes another crime, the perpetrator shall be liable for prosecution for that crime. The Perpetrator Section 12 ‘Perpetrator’ means the principal, the covert offender and the coactor (hereinafter referred to as “parties to a crime”), as well as the abettor and the aider (hereinafter referred to collectively as “accomplices”). Section 13 (1) Perpetrator is a person who actually commits a criminal act. (2) Covert offender is a person who instigates the commission of an intentional offense by using a person who cannot be prosecuted for reason of minority or insanity, of for reason of acting under undue influence by coercion or duress, or under misconception. (3) Coactor is a person who knowingly and voluntarily participates in a criminal act jointly with others, in full knowledge of each others activities. 3 Enters into force as under Subsection (2) of Section 318 of Act CCXXIII of 2012. 4 Section 14 (1) Abettor is a person who intentionally persuades another person to commit a crime. (2) Accomplice is a person who knowingly and voluntarily helps another person to commit a crime. (3) The penalties applicable to parties to a crime shall also apply to accomplices. CHAPTER IV GROUNDS FOR TOTAL OR PARTIAL EXEMPTION FROM CRIMINAL RESPONSIBILITY Section 15 The perpetrator may be totally or partially exempted from criminal responsibility, or an act may be fully or partly exempted from criminalization on the following grounds: a) being below the age of criminal responsibility; b) insanity; c) coercion and threat; d) mistake; e) justifiable defense; f) means of last resort; g) statutory authorization; h) other grounds defined by law. Minimum Age of Criminal Responsibility Section 16 Persons under the age of fourteen years at the time the criminal offense was committed shall be exempt from criminal responsibility, with the exception of homicide [Subsections (1)-(2) of Section 160], voluntary manslaughter (Section 161), battery [Subsection (8) of Section 164], robbery [Subsections (1)-(4) of Section 365] and plundering [Subsections (2)-(3) of Section 366], if over the age of twelve years at the time the criminal offense was committed, and if having the capacity to understand the nature and consequences of his acts. Insanity Section 17 (1) Any person who has committed a criminal act in a state of impairment of the mind of a character such that it is impossible for the person so afflicted to understand the nature and consequences of his acts, shall not be prosecuted. (2) The penalty may be reduced without limitation if the state of impairment of the perpetrator’s mind is of a character such that it is difficult for him to understand the nature and consequences of his acts. 5 Section 18 The provisions of Section 17 shall not apply to persons who engage in criminal activity under self-inflicted influence by alcohol or narcotic drugs. Coercion and Threat Section 19 (1) Any person who has committed a criminal act under undue influence by coercion or threat, depriving him of the capacity to act according to his own free will shall not be prosecuted.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Submit Phone Call Complaint to the Ftc
    Submit Phone Call Complaint To The Ftc Snubby Wait relaying some Helvetia and enucleate his sunkets so heretofore! Barris is reassuringly postiche after shrinelike Ignatius purfles his strikingness aforetime. Deedless Ajai parle, his alamedas backfills tenants downstate. This to answer the area who have a complaint step is often happen at national scale and contact law enforcement officials for them you complaint to the phone call ftc with oral requests. Scams and Safety FBI. You may elevate your complaint via email to agcomplaintagnvgov Please await a legible PDF. Do not accept complaints submitted by phone or an avenue of control over me? The Social Security Administration, dance, like victims of domestic violence. When someone owes a creditor money and skips out these town they pursue some attempt to locate them. File a Complaint South Dakota Do post Call. The phone call to submit the complaint ftc? Anybody contacting you claiming to be nearly the IRS and asking you for personal or financial information is your crook. Trained advocates can submit a member receives. Other options for filing a complaint with the FCC include Phone 1--CALL-FCC 1--225-5322 TTY 1--TELL-FCC 1--35-5322 ASL 1-44-432-2275. Political and safety and report frauds, your credit file a moderated blog and ftc complaint about our resources. They can submit my phone. DCP maintains the giggle of Connecticut consumers who have registered for crack Do whatever Call Registry through the FTC To file a complaint please email dcp. Please note that collects complaints to call? Net neutrality could help improve this phone even after you submitted by email account fraud as identity theft protection activities and ftc also, and eliminate unfair business.
    [Show full text]
  • Presidential Address: "The Anatomy of Treachery"
    © 1957/2010 The British Psychological Society The anatomy of treachery by E. B. Strauss, M.A, D.M., D.Sc., F.R.C.P., Physician for Psychological Medicine, St. Bartholomew’s Hospital, and Lecturer in Psychological Medicine, St. Bartholomew’s Medical College, University of London _____________________________________________________________________ Citation: Strauss, E.B. (1957). The anatomy of treachery. Bulletin of the British Psychological Society. Issue 32, pp.1–13. _____________________________________________________________________ Presidents come and go; they are remembered for a while, and then forgotten by the Society over which they once presided. For the President himself, however, his election is a memorable and moving experience, involving gratitude, often hard to verbalize gracefully, heart-searching and doubts. Further, how few presidential addresses, even if courtesy demands their appearance in print afterwards, prove to be less ephemeral than the may-fly which enjoys life for one glorious day only! It is not since the very early days of this Society that a practising physician, a specialist in psychological medicine, has been accorded the great honour of being President of the British Psychological Society, an important society which is rapidly advancing along the path which, we hope, will end with a Royal Charter; and I am accordingly exceptionally grateful for the high distinction. This society has always had a flourishing Medical Section, which [2]indicates, I think, that medical psychology—i.e. the application of scientific psychological principles to medical problems—is considered to be a legitimate (even if, at times, unruly) child of the parent science. I recently defined psychology as that science which deals with the nature, functions and phenomenology of the mind; but members of the general public appear to have the vaguest ideas as to what a psychologist is.
    [Show full text]
  • Treachery in Poetry
    CORE Metadata, citation and similar papers at core.ac.uk Provided by International Institute for Science, Technology and Education (IISTE): E-Journals Journal of Literature, Languages and Linguistics www.iiste.org ISSN 2422-8435 An International Peer-reviewed Journal Vol.21, 2016 Treachery in Poetry Dr. Syed Mohammed Haseebuddin Quadri Professor, Department of English, Maulana Azad National Urdu University, Hyderabad, India Abstract In this paper an attempt has been made to study treachery in its various forms, and its portrayal in some select verses from the Ghazals of the Urdu poet Ahmed Faraz. These verses exhibit the betrayal of trust and allegiance by relatives and friends. They are chosen for discussion and analysis because they succinctly unveil the intensity and depth of human relations and the complexity of the concept of treachery. Keywords : Treachery, betrayal, treason, Ghazal, friendship, relationship, enemy, opportunism Introduction Treachery as a theme can be found in all forms of literature and all types of literature in the world. When we trace the history of friendship or companionship or acquaintanceship, along with it, we get for free, the history of treachery. It is the state of betrayal of trust, unfaithfulness, disloyalty, and deception. It is a state when the trust is violated and faith is demolished. Its causes are often opportunism and promotion of self-interest. The term treachery is always associated with friends and companions, seldom with foes or enemies. The tool of treachery is often hypocrisy, its agent is friend or companion or a person who receives the favour (from the victim). The motive of treachery may be promotion of self-interest, accessing of comforts and luxury, or jealousy or envy and so on.
    [Show full text]
  • THE UNMANLY FEAR: EXTORTION BEFORE the TWENTIETH CENTURY Joseph S
    Law, Crime and History (2013) 2 THE UNMANLY FEAR: EXTORTION BEFORE THE TWENTIETH CENTURY Joseph S. Bonica1 Abstract This essay concerns the history of extortion in American law and culture, highlighting the shift from extortion as a paradigmatically male enterprise to one inseparably associated with women. Before the nineteenth-century, extortion was figured as an assault on a victim’s consent. Since men monopolized consent, extortion unfolded as a contest between legal subjects over political manhood. After the mid-nineteenth-century, a new class of ‘respectable’ victims, openly terrified by women’s threats, made unprecedented claims for legal protection. In response, well-placed courts wrote consent out of the equation, broadening the scope of extortionous threats to unleash the familiar fin-de-siècle tide of sex scandal. Keywords: extortion and law relating to, blackmail, sexual blackmail, gendered power, consent and coercion Introduction Before the middle of the nineteenth century, women were completely absent from American legal stories of extortion.2 This does not mean that no woman threatened to accuse a man of some crime unless compensated, or that no man tried to gain advantage by threatening to expose some woman’s secrets. There surely were. But in law and culture, extortion had been a legal relationship intimately, even constitutively, about men. In the decade after the end of the American Civil War, however, men in some of the most self-consciously ‘respectable’ circles began to hear warnings that ‘the blackmailer, though sometimes a man, is usually a woman.’3 Historians have noted the development, seeing in this moment the crystallization of what Lawrence Friedman calls the ‘(pure) blackmail’ of sexual scandal.4 Yet, as paradigmatic as the sexualized extortion scene might seem to observers today, the exact nature of the extortionous exchange was not nearly so clear to contemporaries.
    [Show full text]
  • Constitutional Grounds for Presidential Impeachment
    1 116TH CONGRESS " 1st Session COMMITTEE PRINT CONSTITUTIONAL GROUNDS FOR PRESIDENTIAL IMPEACHMENT REPORT BY THE MAJORITY STAFF OF THE HOUSE COMMITTEE ON THE JUDICIARY COMMITTEE ON THE JUDICIARY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES ONE HUNDRED AND SIXTEENTH CONGRESS FIRST SESSION DECEMBER 2019 VerDate Sep 11 2014 17:46 Dec 14, 2019 Jkt 038513 PO 00000 Frm 00001 Fmt 6012 Sfmt 6012 E:\HR\OC\B513A.XXX B513A lotter on DSKBCFDHB2PROD with HEARING E:\Seals\Congress.#13 CONSTITUTIONAL GROUNDS FOR PRESIDENTIAL IMPEACHMENT VerDate Sep 11 2014 17:46 Dec 14, 2019 Jkt 038513 PO 00000 Frm 00002 Fmt 6019 Sfmt 6019 E:\HR\OC\B513A.XXX B513A lotter on DSKBCFDHB2PROD with HEARING with DSKBCFDHB2PROD on lotter 1 116TH CONGRESS " 1st Session COMMITTEE PRINT CONSTITUTIONAL GROUNDS FOR PRESIDENTIAL IMPEACHMENT REPORT BY THE MAJORITY STAFF OF THE HOUSE COMMITTEE ON THE JUDICIARY COMMITTEE ON THE JUDICIARY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES ONE HUNDRED AND SIXTEENTH CONGRESS FIRST SESSION U.S. GOVERNMENT PUBLISHING OFFICE 38–513 WASHINGTON : 2019 VerDate Sep 11 2014 17:46 Dec 14, 2019 Jkt 038513 PO 00000 Frm 00003 Fmt 4012 Sfmt 4012 E:\HR\OC\B513A.XXX B513A lotter on DSKBCFDHB2PROD with HEARING E:\Seals\Congress.#13 VerDate Sep 11 2014 17:46 Dec 14, 2019 Jkt 038513 PO 00000 Frm 00004 Fmt 4012 Sfmt 4012 E:\HR\OC\B513A.XXX B513A lotter on DSKBCFDHB2PROD with HEARING Foreword by Mr. Nadler I am pleased to make available a report prepared by the majority staff addressing constitutional grounds for presidential impeach- ment. The staff of the Committee on the Judiciary first produced a report addressing this topic in 1974, during the impeachment in- quiry into President Richard M.
    [Show full text]
  • Federal Criminal Conspiracy Todd R
    Notre Dame Law School NDLScholarship Journal Articles Publications 1998 Federal Criminal Conspiracy Todd R. Russell O. Carter Snead Notre Dame Law School, [email protected] Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarship.law.nd.edu/law_faculty_scholarship Part of the Criminal Law Commons Recommended Citation Todd R. Russell & O. C. Snead, Federal Criminal Conspiracy, 35 Am. Crim. L. Rev. 739 (1997-1998). Available at: https://scholarship.law.nd.edu/law_faculty_scholarship/20 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Publications at NDLScholarship. It has been accepted for inclusion in Journal Articles by an authorized administrator of NDLScholarship. For more information, please contact [email protected]. FEDERAL CRIMINAL CONSPIRACY I. INTRODUCTION ......................................... 739 II. ELEMENTS OF THE OFFENSE ............................... 741 A. Agreem ent ........................................ 742 B. Illegal Goal ....................................... 745 C. Knowledge, Intent, and Participation.................... 747 D. OvertA ct ........................................ 750 III. D EFENSES ........................................... 751 A. Statute of Limitations ................................ 751 B. Insufficiency of the Indictment ......................... 752 C. Variance ......................................... 753 D. Multiplicitous Indictment ............................. 754 E. Insuffi cient Evidence ................................ 755 F. Withdrawal ......................................
    [Show full text]
  • Considering Collusion: a Primer on Potential Crimes
    CONSIDERING COLLUSION: A PRIMER ON POTENTIAL CRIMES OCTOBER 31, 2018 BARRY H. BERKE, DANI R. JAMES, NOAH BOOKBINDER, AND NORMAN L. EISEN* In brief Although “collusion” is not the name of a codified crime,1 the term has come to be shorthand for the possibility that the Trump campaign, its advisors or the president himself coordinated with Russia to help Trump win the 2016 presidential election. Indeed, Special Counsel Robert Mueller has been authorized to investigate “any links and/or coordination between the Russian government and individuals associated with the campaign of President Donald Trump” and to prosecute federal crimes arising from that investigation.2 The president and his proxies have frequently advanced the claim that such coordination, even if it occurred, would not be unlawful. Their refrain that “collusion is not a crime” is in one sense correct. Collusion is not a single crime. It is instead a rubric that encompasses many possible offenses. We detail some of the principal ones in this report. All turn on the possibility that Trump or his associates took action in connection with Russia’s attempts to impact the outcome of our country’s presidential election. The criminal nature of the Russian effort is already well-known. The special counsel’s 191 charges brought against 35 individuals and companies spell out some of the crimes allegedly committed in furtherance of the Russian attack on our democracy. Those include indictments of Russian individuals and entities for their participation in conspiracies to hack into the computer and email systems of 1 The president himself has invoked the term to suggest various wrongdoing by opponents.
    [Show full text]
  • The Swedish Criminal Code
    The Swedish Criminal Code 1 PREFACE The Swedish Criminal Code (brottsbalken, SFS 1962:700) was adopted in 1962 and entered into force on 1 January 1965. It contains provisions on many of the acts that are criminal offences in Sweden. Provisions on other offences are found in specific acts and laws. The Criminal Code also contains general provisions on all offences, criminal sanctions and the applicability of Swedish law. The most recent translation of the Criminal Code into English was published in Ds 1999:36. The present translation was originally completed in December 2019 by Amy Oliver, in cooperation with Judge of Appeal Mari-Ann Roos and Ministry of Justice Senior Adviser Mikaela Bexar. As of 2020, amendments to the Criminal Code will be translated and published (electronically) before the entry into force and as soon as possible after the publication of the amended Swedish legislation. A reference to the act adopting an amendment is found at the end of each amended section. The Government Offices publishes this translation of the Criminal Code as a service to interested parties but takes no legal responsibility for the translation or for any consequences arising from its use; translations of Swedish legislation have no legal effect. 2 PART ONE General provisions Chapter 1 – On offences and criminal sanctions Section 1 1 § An offence is an act described Brott är en gärning som är in this Code or in another act of beskriven i denna balk eller i law or statute for which a penalty annan lag eller författning och stated below is provided.
    [Show full text]
  • 140262 75C3D0FCD899D.Pdf
    IN THE SUPREME COURT OF IOWA No. 14–0262 Filed May 1, 2015 Amended July 13, 2015 STATE OF IOWA, Appellee, vs. JOHN ROBERT HOYMAN, Appellant. Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Warren County, Rebecca Goodgame Ebinger, Judge. The defendant appeals his conviction and sentence for fraudulent practice following a jury trial. REVERSED AND REMANDED WITH DIRECTIONS. Mark E. Weinhardt and Todd M. Lantz of Weinhardt & Logan, P.C., Des Moines, for appellant. Thomas J. Miller, Attorney General, Kyle P. Hanson and Robert H. Sand, Assistant Attorneys General, for appellee. 2 MANSFIELD, Justice. This case involves an individual who knowingly submitted inaccurate bills to a city while serving as its attorney. The State charged the individual with felonious misconduct in office, see Iowa Code § 721.1(1), (2), (3) (2011), first-degree theft, see id. §§ 714.1(1), .1(3), .2(1), and first-degree fraudulent practice, see id. §§ 714.8(4), .9. The State maintained the defendant had inflated his earnings by billing for trials and prosecutions that did not actually occur. The defendant conceded his past bills were inaccurate, but argued the city largely condoned this practice. He further maintained that he did not bill for more time than he had actually worked overall on city matters. At trial, the district court dismissed the felonious misconduct charge, and the jury acquitted the defendant of theft. However, the jury found the defendant guilty of first-degree fraudulent practice, and he was sentenced to an indeterminate term of ten years in prison. The defendant now appeals his conviction and sentence.
    [Show full text]
  • John Harvey Lee Source: RPC; Luis B. Reyes; Eighteenth Edition
    Criminal Law 1 Summary: John Harvey Lee Source: RPC; Luis B. Reyes; Eighteenth Edition Art. 14: Aggravating Circumstances of the felony as shown by: (1) the motivating power itself, (2) the place of the commission, 1. Advantage of public position (3) the means and ways employed, (4) the time, 2. In contempt of or with insult to public or (5) the personal circumstances of the authorities offender, or of the offended party. 3. With insult or disregard of rank, age, or sex, or in the dwelling of the offended party, if the Four Kinds of aggravating circumstances latter did not provoke 1. Generic: Those that can generally apply to all 4. Abuse of confidence or obvious crimes. (Ex. dwelling, nighttime, or recidivism) ungratefulness 2. Specific: those that apply only to particular 5. Committed in the palace of the Chief crimes. (Ex. Ignominy in crimes against chastity Executive, or in his presence, or where public or cruelty and treachery in crimes against authorities are discharging their duties, or in a persons.) place of religious worship 3. Qualifying: Those that change the nature of 6. Nighttime, or in an uninhabited place, or by a the crime. (Ex. Alevosia (treachery) or evident band premeditation qualifies the killing of person to 7. Committed during a conflagration, shipwreck, murder) earthquake, epidemic, or calamity 4. Inherent: Those that must of necessity 8. With aid of armed men or persons who accompany the commission of the crime. (Ex. insure/afford impunity Those that must of necessity accompany the 9. Recidivism commission of the crime. Ex. Evident 10.
    [Show full text]
  • Prosecuting Attorney: Legal Aspects of the Office Newman F
    Journal of Criminal Law and Criminology Volume 26 Article 1 Issue 5 January-February Winter 1936 Prosecuting Attorney: Legal Aspects of the Office Newman F. Baker Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarlycommons.law.northwestern.edu/jclc Part of the Criminal Law Commons, Criminology Commons, and the Criminology and Criminal Justice Commons Recommended Citation Newman F. Baker, Prosecuting Attorney: Legal Aspects of the Office, 26 Am. Inst. Crim. L. & Criminology 647 (1935-1936) This Article is brought to you for free and open access by Northwestern University School of Law Scholarly Commons. It has been accepted for inclusion in Journal of Criminal Law and Criminology by an authorized editor of Northwestern University School of Law Scholarly Commons. THE PROSECUTING ATTORNEY: LEGAL ASPECTS OF THE OFFICE NEWMAN F. BAKER* A number of studies, descriptive and analytical, dealing with the office of prosecuting attorney in the United States have been pre- sented to the readers of this Journal by Mr. Earl H. De Long and the writer. Not only have the constitutions and statutes relating to the office been examined but its administration has been studied both in its metropolitan and rural environments. The relations between the prosecuting attorney and the attorney-general of the state were discussed and considerable attention was given to the distractions which beset every prosecuting attorney due to the fact that he is a political office holder and is hampered in criminal law enforcement by the wide range of his official duties, quasi-criminal and civil. At this time it seems advisable to consider some of the judicial decisions directly involving the 'office but the task of sifting the thousands of cases in the field is one of great difficulty.
    [Show full text]
  • Military Commission Instruction
    DRAFT Military Commission Instruction Date SUBJECT: Crimes and Elements for Trials by Military Commission References: (a) Military Commission Order No. 1 (March 21, 2002) (b) Military Order of November 13, 2001, “Detention, Treatment, and Trial of Certain Non-Citizens in the War Against Terrorism,” 66 F.R. 57833 (Nov. 16, 2001) (c) Section 113(d) of Title 10 of the United States Code (d) Section 140(b) of Title 10 of the United States Code 1. PURPOSE This instruction provides guidance with respect to crimes that may be tried by military commissions established pursuant to references (a) and (b) and defines the elements of those crimes. 2. AUTHORITY This instruction is issued pursuant to Section 7(A) of reference (a) and in accordance with references (b), (c) and (d). 3. GENERAL A. Background The following crimes and elements thereof are intended for use by military commissions established pursuant to references (a) and (b), the jurisdiction of which extends to offenses or offenders that by statute or the law of armed conflict may be tried by military commission as limited by reference (b). These crimes and elements derive from the law of armed conflict, a body of law that is sometimes referred to as the law of war. They constitute violations of the law of armed conflict or offenses that, consistent with that body of law, are triable by military commission. This document does not preclude trial for crimes that occurred prior to its effective date. DRAFT 1 DRAFT B. Effect on Other Laws No conclusion regarding the applicability or persuasive authority of other bodies of law should be drawn solely from the presence, absence, or similarity of particular language in this instruction as compared to other articulations of law.
    [Show full text]