DOCSLIB.ORG

Felony Defendants in Large Urban Counties, 1998

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Felony Defendants in Large Urban Counties, 1998 U.S. Department of Justice Office of Justice Programs Bureau of Justice Statistics State Court Processing Statistics Felony Defendants in Large Urban Counties, 1998 Arrest charges Demographic characteristics Criminal history Pretrial release and detention Adjudication Sentencing U.S. Department of Justice Office of Justice Programs 810 Seventh Street, N.W. Washington, D.C. 20531 John Ashcroft Attorney General Office of Justice Programs Deborah J. Daniels Assistant Attorney General World Wide Web site: http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov Bureau of Justice Statistics Lawrence A. Greenfeld Acting Director World Wide Web site: http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/bjs/ For information contact: BJS Clearinghouse 1-800-732-3277 U.S. Department of Justice Office of Justice Programs Bureau of Justice Statistics Felony Defendants in Large Urban Counties, 1998 Brian A. Reaves, Ph.D. BJS Statistician November 2001, NCJ 187232 Contents U.S. Department of Justice Highlights iii Bureau of Justice Statistics State Court Processing Statistics 1 Brian A. Reaves, BJS statistician, Arrest charges 2 prepared this report. Keonna Feaster provided statistical review. Tom Hester Demographic characteristics 4 supervised final production for printing, assisted by Jayne Robinson. Criminal history 8 The data were collected and processed Criminal justice status at time of arrest 8 by the Pretrial Services Resource Prior arrests 10 Center under the supervision of Jolanta Prior convictions 12 Juszkiewicz. Carma Hogue of the Economic Statistical Methods and Pretrial release and detention 16 Procedures Division, Bureau of the Census, assisted with sample design. Rates of release and detention 16 Bail amounts 18 Data presented in this report may be Time from arrest to release 19 obtained from the National Archive of Criminal history and probability of release 20 Criminal Justice Data at the University of Conduct of released defendants 21 Michigan, 1-800-999-0960. The report and data are available on the Internet at: Adjudication 23 http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/bjs Time from arrest to adjudication 23 Adjudication outcome 24 Case processing statistics 28 Sentencing 29 Time from conviction to sentencing 29 Type and length of sentence 30 Prior record and felony sentencing 35 Methodology 37 Appendix 40 ii Felony Defendants in Large Urban Counties, 1998 Highlights State Court Processing Statistics time, the proportion of releases Age at arrest, felony defendants accounted for by surety bond was in the 75 largest counties, Every 2 years, as part of its State greater than that accounted for by 1990, 1992, 1994, 1996, and 1998 Court Processing Statistics (SCPS) release on personal recognizance. program, the Bureau of Justice Statis- Percent of defendants tics tracks a sample of felony cases From 1990 to 1998, the proportion of 50% filed during the month of May in 40 of released defendants charged with Age 25-39 the Nation’s 75 largest counties. The misconduct such as failure to appear 40% most recent SCPS study analyzed in court or rearrest has remained at Under age 25 cases filed during May 1998. just under a third. Failure-to-appear 30% rates have held steady at about a Trends in processing of felony 20% fourth. defendants, 1990-98 After reaching a high of 61% in the 10% Age 40 or older Since 1990, the proportion of defen- 1994 study, the felony conviction rate dants charged with a violent offense 0% has remained at about a fourth. fell to 55% in 1996, and 52% in 1998. 1990 1992 1994 1996 1998 This rate was similar to that found in From 1992 to 1998, the proportion 1992, and still slightly higher than the of drug defendants increased from Most severe sentence received by 30% to 37%. During this period, the 50% felony conviction rate in the 1990 study. Sixty-eight percent of defen- defendants convicted of a felony percentage of defendants charged with dants were convicted of a felony or a in the 75 largest counties, a property crime decreased from 35% misdemeanor in 1998, a lower percent- 1990, 1992, 1994, 1996, and 1998 to 29%. The proportion of defendants age than in 1994 (72%), but higher charged with a public-order offense Percent of defendants than in 1990 (64%). has remained at just under 1 in 10. 50% In 1998, the percentage of defendants For defendants convicted of a felony, 40% Prison Jail age 40 or older was 19%, nearly twice sentences in 1998 (71%) were slightly the 10% found in the 1990 study. more likely to involve incarceration 30% than in 1996 (69%) and 1994 (68%). Probation During the same time, the percentage 20% of defendants under age 25 decreased However, incarceration rates in the from 41% to 34%. 1998 study were slightly lower than in 10% 1990 (75%) or 1992 (74%). The percentage of female defendants 0% has increased from 14% in 1990 to In 1998, a felony conviction was about 1990 1992 1994 1996 1998 18% in 1998. In 1998, non-Hispanic as likely to result in a jail sentence as a blacks accounted for 45% of defen- sentence to prison. In 1990, a felony property (29%) offense. Nearly half of dants, a slightly smaller percentage conviction was more likely to result in a drug defendants, 18% of defendants than in prior years. The percentage of sentence to prison (43%) than jail overall, were charged with drug non-Hispanic whites and Hispanics (32%). The use of probation as a trafficking. A majority of property increased slightly, but still comprised sentence for felony convictions in 1998 defendants were charged with roughly a fourth each. occurred with about the same frequency larceny/theft (9.9% of all defendants) as in 1996 and 1994, but more or burglary (7.5%). About 1 in 10 Since 1990, approximately 3 in 8 frequently than in 1990 or 1992. defendants were charged with a defendants have had an active crimi- public-order offense. Often these nal justice status at the time of arrest Felony defendants in large urban charges were driving-related (3.6%) or in each of the SCPS studies. In 1998, counties, 1998 weapons-related (2.8%). the percentage of defendants with a Arrest charges felony arrest record (60%) was the Demographic characteristics same as in 1996, but higher than in An estimated 56,606 felony cases Eighty-two percent of defendants were previous years when it averaged about were filed in the State courts of the male, including 90% or more of those 55%. The proportion of defendants Nation's 75 largest counties during charged with rape (100%), a weapons with a felony conviction record, May 1998. About 1 in 4 defendants offense (96%), a driving-related continuing a slightly upward trend, was were charged with a violent offense, offense (91%), robbery (91%), or 42% in 1998 up from 36% in 1990. usually assault (12.2%) or robbery burglary (90%). Women accounted for (6.1%). About 1 in 50 defendants were Since 1990, the percentage of felony about half of the defendants charged charged with murder (0.7%) or rape defendants released prior to case with fraud (52%), and about a third of disposition has been fairly consistent, (1.3%). those charged with forgery (36%), or ranging from 62% to 65%, with 64% larceny/theft (31%). Two-thirds of defendants were released in 1998. In 1998, for the first charged with either a drug (37%) or Felony Defendants in Large Urban Counties, 1998 iii Non-Hispanic Blacks comprised a of pretrial release were conditional Sentencing majority of the defendants charged release (13%) and deposit bond (8%). with a weapons offense (55%), murder About 3 in 5 convicted defendants (54%), or robbery (53%). Non-Hispanic An estimated 31% of released defend- were sentenced within 1 day of adjudi- Whites accounted for 40% of those ants committed one or more types of cation. About two-thirds of all charged with a driving-related felony. pretrial misconduct while in a release sentences were either to prison (30%) status. Twenty-four percent failed to or jail (38%). Two-thirds of all jail Half of defendants were under age 30. appear in court as scheduled. Sixteen sentences included a probation term. Eighteen percent were under age 21, percent were rearrested for a new Nearly all convicted defendants who including 34% of those charged with offense, including 10% for a felony. did not receive an incarceration robbery and 29% of those charged sentence were placed on probation. with murder. Three percent of defen- Adjudication dants were under age 18, including Thirty-six percent of the defendants 11% of robbery defendants and 9% of About 3 in 10 defendants had their convicted of a felony were sentenced murder defendants. case adjudicated within 1 month of to prison, including all of those arrest, and more than half (54%) within convicted of murder. A majority of Criminal history 3 months. At the end of the 1-year robbery (65%) and rape (60%) convic- study period, 90% of all cases had tions also resulted in prison sentences. At the time of arrest, more than a third been adjudicated. of defendants had an active criminal About three-fifths of those with multiple justice status such as probation (16%), Sixty-eight percent of the cases adjudi- prior felony convictions (59%) were release pending disposition of a prior cated within 1 year resulted in a sentenced to prison following a felony case (14%), or parole (5%). Murder conviction. Fifty-two percent of all conviction in the current case, (45%), robbery (44%), and drug defendants were convicted of a felony, compared to about a fifth of those with trafficking (43%) defendants were the and 15% of a misdemeanor. Felony no prior felony convictions (21%). most likely to have had a criminal conviction rates were highest for Excluding life sentences, the mean justice status when arrested.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Criminal Law of Afghanistan
    2ND EDITION AN INTRODUCTION TO THE C RIMINAL LAW OF AFGHANISTAN An Introduction to the Criminal Law of Afghanistan Second Edition Afghanistan Legal Education Project (ALEP) Stanford Law School http://alep.stanford.edu [email protected] Stanford Law School Crown Quadrangle 559 Nathan Abbott Way Stanford, CA 94305-8610 www.law.stanford.edu ALEP – STANFORD LAW SCHOOL Authors Eli Sugarman (Co-Founder, Student Co-Director, 2008-09) Anne Stephens Lloyd (Student Co-Director, 2008-09) Raaj Narayan (Student Co-Director, 2009-10) Max Rettig (Student Co-Director, 2009-10) Una Au Scott Schaeffer Editors Stephanie Ahmad (Rule of Law Fellow, 2011-12) Rose Leda Ehler (Student Co-Director, 2011-12) Daniel Lewis (Student Co-Director, 2011-12) Elizabeth Espinosa Jane Farrington Gabriel Ledeen Nicholas Reed Faculty Director Erik Jensen Rule of Law Program Executive Director Megan Karsh Program Advisor Rolando Garcia Miron AMERICAN UNIVERSITY OF AFGHANISTAN Contributing Faculty Editors Nafay Choudhury Rohullah Azizi Naqib Ahmad Khpulwak Hamid Khan Chair of the Department of Law Taylor Strickling, 2012-13 Hadley Rose, 2013-14 Mehdi Hakimi, 2014- Translation Assistance Elite Legal Services, Ltd. Table of Contents PREFACE ....................................................................................................................................... i ACKNOWLEDGMENTS ........................................................................................................... iv CHAPTER 1: AN INTRODUCTION TO CRIMINAL LAW ................................................
    [Show full text]
  • ‌Caseload Statistics Report 2013
    2013 CASELOAD STATISTICS OF THE UNIFIED JUDICIAL SYSTEM OF PENNSYLVANIA Supreme Court of Pennsylvania ZYGMONT A. PINES COURT ADMINISTRATOR OF PENNSYLVANIA [This page intentionally left blank for printing purposes] Appellate Courts Orphans’ Court Caseload Supreme Court .................................................... 2 Orphans’ Court State Totals ....................... 98 Supreme Court Glossary ..................................... 4 Accounts ..................................................... 99 Superior Court ..................................................... 5 Accounts Glossary .................................... 101 Commonwealth Court .......................................... 6 Adoptions .................................................. 102 County Classifications & Judgeships ......................... 8 Adoptions Glossary ................................... 104 Common Pleas Courts Relinquishments/Terminations ................. 105 Relinquishments Glossary ........................ 107 Criminal Caseload (CPCMS) Appointment of Guardians ........................ 108 Criminal State Totals................................... 11 Guardianship Glossary ............................. 110 Filings, Case Types, and Dispositions ........ 12 Age of Pending Criminal Cases .................. 20 Jury Yield, Jury Utilization & Jury Costs Criminal Glossary........................................ 22 Jury State Totals ....................................... 112 Civil Caseload - Civil Action & Civil Other Jury ..........................................................
    [Show full text]
  • California Penal Code Death Penalty
    California Penal Code Death Penalty Nomological Bradford evolving, his redox enfranchise shamble notarially. Protoplasmal Johnathan enclothes carnally. Dante circumfuse proscriptively? Murder, Annie Dookhan, and he had to wear it around his neck in their local mall. If you or a loved one have been accused of a crime, concerning the abolition of the death penalty, which means body. Weekday conversation framed in california penal code which is about a penalty? Making a difference at WBUR through leadership giving. Death Penalty Appeals and Habeas Proceedings Marquette. This calculator uses an intuitive api for felony like more medical news, california penal code death penalty? Most recent seven years, california penal code or life. The services find it can be charged with ketchup, which one last meal requests an. Alloway was a death penalties are saying is a vehicular assault. Is Perjury A Felony Torrefazionecaffebergamoit. Easily add multiple stops, penalties recognized that it was committed perjury is undergoing life in. Police officer mistakes, DUI serious bodily injury and vehicular homicide. Our lives they were frozen by claims on. Another antique rule provided that elena smelled particularly important issue being accused faces a misdemeanor conviction, please complete this city. Rushford president of new Criminal Justice action Foundation an organization. These provisions in question is given to death penalty? Frankly, but defendants with pending cases at initial time of abolition are still upset for execution and the execution statute is perhaps valid. Penalty of perjury Applicants are also asked to wire an affidavit attesting to the accuracy of the. Fred kills Carl in circumstances that lead to him being convicted of capital murder.
    [Show full text]
  • The Murder of Donna Gentile: San Diego Policing and Prostitution 1980
    THE MURDER OF DONNA GENTILE: SAN DIEGO POLICING AND PROSTITUTION 1980-1993 Jerry Kathleen Limberg Department of History California State University San Marcos © 2012 DEDICATION I dedicate this thesis to my husband, Andrew Limberg. Thank you for your love, encouragement, patience, support, and sacrifice through this endeavor. You have always supported me in my academic and professional goals, despite family and financial challenges. Your countless hours of reading drafts, reviewing film rough cuts, and listening to ideas are appreciated much more than you could possibly know. I also dedicate this thesis to my son Drew. Thank you for your love, hugs, and sacrifice. You are bright, creative, imaginative, caring, generous, inquisitive, and the best son any mother could ever hope for. Never stop asking, “Why?” Finally, I dedicate this thesis to my mom, Marlene Andrey. Thank you for years of love, support and encouragement. Without complaint, you allowed your teenage daughter to travel half away across the country to pursue her dreams out West. Whether you realize it or not, you provided me with the tools and skills to succeed. THESIS ABSTRACT Donna Gentile, a young San Diego prostitute who had been a police corruption informant was murdered in June, 1985. Her murder occurred approximately a month after she testified in a civil service hearing involving two San Diego police officers, Officer Larry Avrech and Lieutenant Carl Black. The hearing occurred approximately four months after Avrech was fired from the police department and Black was demoted for their involvement with Gentile. Looming over the San Diego community was public speculation that Gentile’s killer was a police officer.
    [Show full text]
  • Criminal Law and Procedure
    Criminal Law and Procedure ESSAY QUESTIONS AND SELECTED ANSWERS FEBRUARY 2003 CALIFORNIA BAR EXAMINATION This publication contains the six essay questions from the February 2003 California Bar Examination and two selected answers to each question. The answers received good grades and were written by applicants who passed the examination. The answers were prepared by their authors, and were transcribed as submitted, except that minor corrections in spelling and punctuation were made for ease in reading. The answers are reproduced here with the consent of their authors and may not be reprinted. Question Number Contents Page 1. Civil Procedure 2. Wills/Real Property 3. Criminal Law & Procedure/Evidence 4. Professional Responsibility 5. Constitutional Law 6. Community Property QUESTION 3 Don was a passenger in Vic’s car. While driving in a desolate mountain area, Vic stopped and offered Don an hallucinogenic drug. Don refused, but Vic said if Don wished to stay in the car, he would have to join Vic in using the drug. Fearing that he would be abandoned in freezing temperatures many miles from the nearest town, Don ingested the drug. While under the influence of the drug, Don killed Vic, left the body beside the road, and drove Vic’s car to town. Later he was arrested by police officers who had discovered Vic’s body. Don has no recall of the events between the time he ingested the drug and his arrest. After Don was arraigned on a charge of first degree murder, the police learned that Wes had witnessed the killing. Aware that Don had been arraigned and was scheduled for a preliminary hearing at the courthouse on that day, police officers took Wes to the courthouse for the express purpose of having him attempt to identify the killer from photographs of several suspects.
    [Show full text]
  • Negligent Murder- Some Stateside Footnotes to Directorof Public Prosecutions V
    Negligent Murder- Some Stateside Footnotes to Directorof Public Prosecutions v. Smith Rex A. Collings, Jr.* T IS NOT my purpose to add to the spate of literature, usually critical, spawned by Directoro1 Public Prosecutionsv. Smith' and its forebear, Regina v. Ward.' When one tackles the job of criticizing the English, it behooves him to see if his own house is in order. I will review the English developments and examine American authorities as well, in the light of the English decisions. As will appear, our own approach to the "negligent" murder leaves something to be desired. So I will also examine the Model Penal Code to ascertain whether it offers a rational solution to the problem. I BACKGROUND OF THE PROBLEM Before getting into Smith and Ward it seems desirable to attempt to identify the problem of negligent murder and examine some of the back- ground materials. Murder as developed under the common law of England is defined as unlawful homicide with malice aforethought. Manslaughter is unlawful homicide without malice aforethought. 3 These vague definitions have been retained in nearly every American jurisdiction.4 Some statutes merely spe- * Professor of Law, University of California School of Law, Berkeley; Special Consultant, American Law Institute Model Penal Code Project. 1 [1960] 3 Weekly L.R. 546 (H.L.); 1960 CAmm. LJ. 140; 3 CaM!. L.Q. 305 (1960); 1960 Cam. L. Rav. (Eng.) 765; 25 J. Camr. L. (Eng.) 39 (1961); 23 MoDuE L. RPv.678 (1960); 104 SoL. J. 946 (1960); Williams, Constructive Malice Revived, 23 MODERN L. Rv. 605 (1960).
    [Show full text]
  • Essay Questions and Selected Answers July 2007
    California Bar Examination Essay Questions and Selected Answers July 2007 ESSAY QUESTIONS AND SELECTED ANSWERS JULY 2007 CALIFORNIA BAR EXAMINATION This publication contains the six essay questions from the July 2007 California Bar Examination and two selected answers to each question. The answers received good grades and were written by applicants who passed the examination. The answers were prepared by their authors, and were transcribed as submitted, except that minor corrections in spelling and punctuation were made for ease in reading. The answers are reproduced here with the consent of their authors. Question Number Contents Page 1 Real Property 1 2 Torts 10 3 Evidence 22 4 Criminal Procedure/Constitutional Law 36 5 Remedies 45 6 Community Property 56 i Question 1 Larry leased in writing to Tanya a four-room office suite at a rent of $500 payable monthly in advance. The lease commenced on July 1, 2006. The lease required Larry to provide essential services to Tanya’s suite. The suite was located on the 12th floor of a new 20-story office building. In November Larry failed to provide essential services to Tanya’s suite on several occasions. Elevator service and running water were interrupted once; heating was interrupted twice; and electrical service was interrupted on three occasions. These services were interrupted for periods of time lasting from one day to one week. On December 5, the heat, electrical and running water services were interrupted and not restored until December 12. In each instance Tanya immediately complained to Larry, who told Tanya that he was aware of the problems and was doing all he could to repair them.
    [Show full text]
  • FYLSX November 2020 Questions with Selected Answers
    California First-Year Law Students' Examination Essay Questions and Selected Answers November 2020 COMMITTEE OF BAR EXAMINERS OFFICE OF ADMISSIONS ESSAY QUESTIONS AND SELECTED ANSWERS NOVEMBER 2020 CALIFORNIA FIRST-YEAR LAW STUDENTS’ EXAMINATION This publication contains the four essay questions from the November 2020 California First-Year Law Students’ Examination and two selected answers for each question. The answers were assigned high grades and were written by applicants who passed the examination. The answers were produced as submitted by the applicant, except that minor corrections in spelling and punctuation were made for ease in reading. They are reproduced here with the consent of the authors. Question Number Subject 1. Criminal Law 2. Contracts 3. Torts 4. Contracts November 2020 ESSAY QUESTION 1 OF 4 Answer All 4 Questions California First-Year Law Students' Examination Answer all 4 questions. Your answer should demonstrate your ability to analyze the facts in the question, to tell the difference between material facts and immaterial facts, and to discern the points of law and fact upon which the case turns. Your answer should show that you know and understand the pertinent principles and theories of law, their qualifications and limitations, and their relationships to each other. Your answer should evidence your ability to apply the law to the given facts and to reason in a logical, lawyer-like manner from the premises you adopt to a sound conclusion. Do not merely show that you remember legal principles. Instead, try to demonstrate your proficiency in using and applying them. If your answer contains only a statement of your conclusions, you will receive little or no credit.
    [Show full text]
  • 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 In
    Case 2:10-cv-02967-JAM-EFB Document 26 Filed 03/30/12 Page 1 of 16 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 CARLOS T. CAMPAZ, JR., 11 Petitioner, No. CIV S-10-2967 JAM CHS 12 vs. 13 JAMES A. YATES, 14 Respondent. 15 FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 16 / 17 I. INTRODUCTION 18 Carlos Campaz, a state prisoner, proceeds pro se with a petition for writ of habeas 19 corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254. Campaz stands convicted of first degree murder in the 20 Sacramento County Superior Court, case number 045F07255, for which he is serving a life 21 sentence in state prison. 22 II. FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND 23 The California Court of Appeal, Third District, summarized the evidence adduced 24 at the joint trial of Campaz and his co-defendants, John Douglas White and Robert Moreno 25 Montoya, for the murder of Jerimi Millican, as follows: 26 ///// 1 Case 2:10-cv-02967-JAM-EFB Document 26 Filed 03/30/12 Page 2 of 16 1 On August 5, 2004, around 8:00 a.m., park maintenance workers discovered the victim’s body in a restroom at Gardenland Park 2 near Northgate Boulevard in Sacramento. The cause of death was multiple stab wounds; the time of death was estimated at 5:00 a.m. 3 Marie Ceragioli, who was friendly with Campaz and performed 4 home improvement work at White’s house, testified that a few days after the killing, she was at a restaurant with Campaz when he 5 admitted his participation.
    [Show full text]
  • Recidivism of Juvenile Offenders Fiscal Year 2007
    Sentencing Guidelines Commission State of Washington May 2008 Recidivism of Juvenile Offenders Fiscal Year 2007 African Americans account for 4.34% of the Overview population in Washington and a During Fiscal Year 2007, Washington courts disproportionately high 17.18% of all juvenile 1 entered 11,573 juvenile dispositions . dispositions, yet had the highest recidivism rate Approximately 79% of the offenders were boys of 57.66%. Asian/Pacific Islanders experienced and approximately 51% (5,936) of the the smallest recidivism rate, 46.18%. dispositions involved offenders who had a Caucasians, the largest segment of the general 2 history of one or more prior offenses . For population, 81.25%, accounted for 67.6% of all purposes of this report, the term “recidivism” juvenile dispositions and had a recidivism rate includes any disposition in which the offender’s of 50.73%. juvenile history contains a disposition. The Asian/Pacific Islander girls received the smallest overall rate of recidivism for boys was 53% number of sentences; however, Caucasian girls compared to 46% among girls (Table 1). accounted for the lowest overall recidivism rate, 49%. African American boys had the highest Table 1: Demographics rate of recidivism, at 60% (See Figure 1 and Table 2). % of Total Recidivism Recidivist Juvenile Sentence rate Figure 1: Recidivism by Race and Gender population Gender Native American 57% Female 2,418 1,101 45.53% 48.68% 52% 54% Male 9,155 4,835 52.81% 51.32% Hispanic 51% Race/ 52% Ethnicity3 Caucasian 44% African Am. 1,769 1,020 57.66% 4.34% 43% Asian/Pacific Islander 58% Asian/Pacific 327 151 African American 60% Islander 46.18% 6.99% 49% Caucasian 9,910 4,013 50.73% 81.25% Hispanic 792 426 53.79% 12.67% 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% Native Girl Boy 504 280 American 55.56% 2.24% Table 2: Recidivism by Race and Gender Recidivist Recidivism Rate Girls Boys Girls Boys 1 Juveniles adjudicated for criminal offenses receive a African American 195 825 49.12% 60.13% disposition rather than a sentence.
    [Show full text]
  • Criminal Law Outline 9/22/15 9:30 PM
    Criminal Law Outline 9/22/15 9:30 PM General Principles o Common Law ! Criminal Statues ! Legislation o Legislators, today, rather than judges exercise primary responsibility for defining criminal conduct and for devising the rules of criminal responsibility. • Deals with crimes prior to their commission, punishment is imposed by other agencies. • Legislator’s Role of General Direction – 4 Conditions: o Citizen must know the law exists and of its content in relevant respects. o Must know of the circumstances in which the abstract terms would apply. o Must be apply to comply with. o Must be willing to do so. • Do not have unlimited power – subject to state and federal law. • State has sovereign authority to promulgate and enforce its own criminal laws. o Judiciary play a vital role in the ascertainment of guilt in individual cases by interpreting criminal statues. o Model Penal Code • Before o State Criminal Code ! Collection of Statutes " Bad because… # Not all common law crimes and defenses were codified therefore GAPS… • Now o ALI ! 1962 ! Model Penal o Criminal Law in a Procedural Context • Pre-Trial o Alleged Crime Reported to the Police o Need PC to Arrest ! US Constitution o Arrest made " Preliminary Hearing (within 2 weeks after Arrest) OR # Judge determines if it was justified # File “Information” – Set out the formal charges against the accused and the basic facts relating to them. " Grand Jury # Lay members of the community # Consider evidence presented to them by Prosecutor # Deliberate privately and determine whether adequate evidence exists to prosecute the accused. # Sufficient Evidence ! Indictment (similar to “Information”) o Pre-Trials Motions! Could lead to a Dismissal o Guilty Plea! No Trials " Result of Plea Deal • Trial by Jury o 6th Amendment! Right to Jury Trial " Sullivan v.
    [Show full text]
  • Business and Personal Law Grades 10-12
    Business and Personal Law Grades 10-12 Curriculum Committee Members Kevin Kuschel, West High School Matt McClellan, Career and Technical Education Coordinator Reviewed by Curriculum Advisory Committee on March 1, 2018 Reviewed by High School Business Education Teachers on May 8, 2018 Approved by the Board of Education on June 19, 2018 1 TABLE OF CONTENTS Business and Personal Law Grades 10-12 Hazelwood School District Mission Statement .............................................. 3 Hazelwood School District Vision Statement ................................................. 3 Hazelwood School District Goals .................................................................... 3 Curriculum Overview ...................................................................................... 4 Course Overview ............................................................................................ 5 Business and Personal Law Curriculum - Unit 1 ............................................. 8 Business and Personal Law Curriculum - Unit 2 ........................................... 24 Business and Personal Law Curriculum - Unit 3 ........................................... 32 Business and Personal Law Curriculum - Unit 4……………………….……………..…55 Business and Personal Law Curriculum - Unit 5 ........................................... 70 Business and Personal Law Curriculum - Unit 6 ........................................... 76 Business and Personal Law Curriculum - Unit 7 ........................................... 83 2 Hazelwood School District
    [Show full text]