Part 1 The Book For This Course Is Criminal Law Oer Chapter

Part 1the Book For This Course Iscriminal Law Oerpdfchapter 41 If Th

Analyze key concepts in criminal law based on chapters 4 and 5 of the provided textbook. Address whether failing to act can be a crime under the law, considering the doctrine of omissions to act and societal duties. Illustrate with a relevant example. Examine factual and legal causation through a case where a child is unintentionally killed due to another's act, identifying who is responsible. Describe the "Choice of Evils" defense, its three essential elements, and provide an example. Explain the duress defense, its three elements, and offer a situational example.

In addition, explore three theories used to understand police organizational structures and operational strategies, and describe the concept of police subculture in detail.

Review the procedural aspects of criminal investigation: the six basic interrogatory questions, purpose of fillers in photo lineups, and the role of CODIS in solving crimes.

Discuss legal procedures and case law regarding police procedures: analyze whether the show-up in Perry v. New Hampshire was accidental, summarize arguments for and against applying the Manson two-prong test, and state your opinion supported by facts and opinions. Explain how SCOTUS addresses innocence and evidence-based decision-making.

Describe the facts and rulings in Hudson v. Michigan, summarize the majority's reasoning for the "knock-and-announce" rule, present the dissenting view, and interpret Justice Kennedy's concurring opinion. Conclude with your assessment of which argument is stronger and justify your position.

Paper For Above instruction

Criminal law establishes the boundaries of conduct that the state defines as offenses, and understanding the nuances of omissions, causation, defenses, organizational theories, investigative procedures, and legal rulings is essential for a comprehensive grasp of the subject. This paper explores the multifaceted aspects of criminal liability and law enforcement procedures, providing detailed analysis and contextual examples.

Legal Basis for Omissions to Act

In criminal law, a key question pertains to whether failing to act can constitute a crime if there is no obligation to intervene. Generally, the law requires an intentional act for criminal liability; however, there are exceptions through the doctrine of omissions to act. The law recognizes that in some circumstances, a person’s failure to act can be criminal if they have a legal duty to do so. For example, a parent has a legal duty to provide necessary care for their child. If the parent neglects this duty resulting in harm or death, their inaction can be criminally liable (We're presented with the principle that omissions are punishable if a legal duty exists). The duty to act exists for everyone in society in specific contexts such as statutory obligations, relationships (e.g., parent-child), and contracts (e.g., lifeguards during emergencies). An example is when a lifeguard fails to rescue a drowning person, which can constitute a crime if they are legally obligated to act.

Factual and Legal Causation in Child's Death

The case involving Tom, Julie, and their child illustrates causation principles. The factual cause of the child's death is Tom’s backing up car which resulted in hitting the child. Factual causation, or "but-for" causation, states that but for Tom's action, the child would not have died. Legally, causation also considers whether the defendant's conduct is a substantial factor in bringing about the harm. Since Tom's driving directly led to the child's death, both factual and legal causation point to Tom as responsible. However, Julie's act of placing the child behind the tire constitutes an act of malicious intent, potentially implicating her as well. Nonetheless, Tom's negligent operation of the vehicle is the primary cause of death, making him culpable under criminal law.

Defense of "Choice of Evils"

The "Choice of Evils" defense justifies conduct that would otherwise be criminal if it seeks to prevent a greater harm. The three elements essential for this defense include: (1) the defendant must reasonably believe that a commission of a criminal act is necessary to avoid a greater harm; (2) the defendant must have no reasonable legal alternative; and (3) the harm avoided must outweigh the harm caused by the illegal act. For example, breaking into a building to rescue someone trapped inside during a fire could be justified under this doctrine if legal avenues are unavailable.

Duress Defense

The duress defense applies when a person commits a crime due to immediate threat or harm from another individual. Its three elements include: (1) a threat of serious bodily harm or death; (2) the threat must be imminent; and (3) the defendant must perceive no reasonable way to escape the threat other than committing the crime. An example is being coerced by an armed attacker to assist in a robbery under threat of violence.

Understanding Police Organizational Structures and Subculture

Three prominent theories explaining police organizational structures are the bureaucratic, community, and military models. The bureaucratic model emphasizes hierarchical authority, rules-based procedures, and formalized roles. The community policing model fosters collaboration and problem-solving with community members. The military model adopts a top-down command structure, emphasizing discipline and order. The police subculture refers to the shared values, norms, and beliefs among officers that influence behavior, often characterized by a sense of camaraderie, skepticism of outsiders, and a code of silence. These cultural aspects can impact policing strategies and conduct.

Investigative Procedures and Crime-Solving Tools

In criminal investigations, six fundamental questions guide inquiry: Who, What, When, Where, Why, and How. These questions help investigators gather comprehensive information about a case. Fillers in photo lineups are individuals who do not match the suspect's description but are included to prevent the witness from identifying someone due to familiarity or bias. CODIS (Combined DNA Index System) is a national DNA database that compares DNA evidence from crime scenes with profiles of known individuals, substantially aiding in matching suspects and solving crimes rapidly and accurately.

Legal Cases: Perry v. New Hampshire and Hudson v. Michigan

The case of Perry v. New Hampshire examined whether the police show-up identification was accidental. The court found that the identification was deliberate and that the Manson two-prong test, which assesses suggestiveness and reliability, did not apply in this context because of the nature of the procedure. Justice Sotomayor argued that the Manson test should apply to ensure fairness and reliability in eyewitness identification. Personally, applying the Manson test to show-up procedures is crucial because it balances reliability concerns with investigative needs, ensuring that evidence used against suspects is trustworthy. The Supreme Court emphasizes justice and fairness, addressing the principles of innocence and the importance of safeguarding evidence-based decision-making.

In Hudson v. Michigan, police entered Booker T. Hudson's home without knocking and announcing their presence. The majority justified the "knock-and-announce" rule as necessary to protect individual privacy and safety. The dissent contended that the exception hampers effective policing and increases risks to officers. Justice Kennedy's concurring opinion highlighted that the exception should be narrowly construed, balancing law enforcement needs with constitutional rights. I believe the stronger argument favoring the strict application of the knock-and-announce rule is justified because it upholds constitutional protections against unreasonable searches, which are fundamental to individual privacy rights.

Conclusion

This exploration highlights the complexities within criminal law, police procedures, and judicial interpretations. Understanding the legal principles of omissions, causation, defenses, and procedural safeguards is essential for justice. The nuanced debates in case law reflect ongoing efforts to balance societal interests, individual rights, and effective law enforcement, underscoring the dynamic nature of criminal justice.

References

• Dressler, J. (2018). Criminal Law (7th ed.). Wolters Kluwer.
• Walker, S., & Katz, C. (2018). The Police in America: An Introduction (9th ed.). McGraw-Hill Education.
• Swanson, C., Chamelin, N., Territo, L., & Taylor, R. (2020). Criminal Investigation (11th ed.). McGraw-Hill Education.
• Samaha, J. (2021). Criminal Procedure (10th ed.). Cengage Learning.
• Supreme Court of the United States. Perry v. New Hampshire, 565 U.S. 228 (2012).
• Supreme Court of the United States. Hudson v. Michigan, 547 U.S. 586 (2006).
• Fridell, L. (2017). The Policeman's Dilemma: Using Theories to Understand Police Behavior. Journal of Criminal Justice.
• Skolnick, J. H. (2018). Justice Without Trial: Law Enforcement in Democratic Society. Prentice Hall.
• Gaines, L., & Miller, R. (2020). Criminal Justice in Action (10th ed.). Cenage.
• Inbau, F. E., Reid, J. E., Buckley, J. P., & Jayne, B. C. (2013). Criminal Interrogation and Confession (5th ed.). Jones & Bartlett Learning.