Criminal Law

Cook, Marcus
5th Edition
ISBN: 0820557536
Page Case Name Citation Court Audio
48 United States v. Jackson 835 F.2d 1195 United States Court of Appeals, 7th Circuit, 1987 Download
19 Bowers v. Hardwick 478 U.S. 186 Supreme Court of the United States, 1986 Download
58 Robinson v. California 370 U.S. 660 Supreme Court of the United States, 1962 Download
62 Powell v. Texas 392 U.S. 514 Supreme Court of the United States, 1968 Download
89 Morissette v. United States 342 U.S. 246 Supreme Court of the United States, 1952 Download
141 People v. Campbell 124 Mich. App. 333, 335 N.W.2d 27 Court of Appeals of Michigan, 1983 Download
142 Lambert v. California 355 U.S. 225 Supreme Court of the United States, 1957 Download
161 People v. Hood 1 Cal. 3d 444, 462 P.2d 370 Supreme Court of California, 1969 Download
182 Commonwealth v. Welansky 316 Mass. 383, 55 N.E.2d 902 Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court, 1944 Download
212 Staples v. United States 511 U.S. 600 Supreme Court of the United States, 1994 Download
230 State v. Gladstone 78 Wash. 2d 306, 474 P.2d 274 Supreme Court of Washington, 1980 Download
263 Topolewski v. State 130 Wis. 244, 109 N.W. 1037 Supreme Court of Wisconsin, 1906 Download
270 Hufstetler v. State 37 Ala. App. 71, 63 So. 2d 730 Alabama Court of Appeals, 1953 Download
377 Washington v. Glucksberg 521 U.S. 702 Supreme Court of the United States, 1997 Download
390 Keeler v. Superior Court 470 P.2d 617 Supreme Court of California, 1970 Download
509 Commonwealth v. Root 403 Pa. 571, 170 A.2d 310 Supreme Court of Pennsylvania, 1961 Download
585 People v. Dlugash 41 N.Y.2d 725, 363 N.E.2d 1155 New York Court of Appeals, 1977 Download
639 Pinkerton v. United States 328 U.S. 640 Supreme Court of the United States, 1946 Download
649 People v. Goetz 68 N.Y.2d 96, 497 N.E.2d 41 New York Court of Appeals, 1986 Download
703 People v. Ceballos 12 Cal. 3d 470, 526 P.2d 241 Supreme Court of California, 1974 Download
708 Tennessee v. Garner 471 U.S. 1 Supreme Court of the United States, 1985 Download
784 M'Naghten's Case 10 Cl. & F. 200, 8 Eng. Rep. 718 House of Lords, 1843 Download
800 United States v. Brawner 471 F.2d 969 United States Court of Appeals, District of Columbia Circuit, 1972 Download
39 Regina v. Dudley and Stephens 14 Q.B.D. 273 Queen's Bench Division, 1884 Download
27 Commonwealth v. Wasson 842 S.W.2d 487 Supreme Court of Kentucky, 1992
15 Griswold v. Connecticut 381 U.S. 479 Supreme Court of the United States, 1965 Download
5 D.P. v. State 705 So. 2d 593, cert. denied, 525 U.S. 1028 District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District, 1997
1 Commonwealth v. Jones 880 S.W.2d 544 Supreme Court of Kentucky, 1994 Download
76 Weishaupt v. Commonwealth 227 Va. 389, 315 S.E.2d 847 Supreme Court of Virginia, 1984
72 State v. Palendrano 120 N.J. Super. 336, 293 A.2d 747 Superior Court of New Jersey, 1972 Download
36 Regina v. Jones 115 Can. Crim. Cases 273 Ontario Court of Appeal, 1956 Download
10 State v. Mortimer 142 N.C. App. 321, 542 S.E.2d 330 Court of Appeals of North Carolina, 2001 Download
83 United States v. Reid 206 F. Supp. 2d 132 United States District Court, D. Mass., 2002 Download
98 People v. Turner 249 Ill. App. 3d 474, 619 N.E.2d 781 Illinois Court of Appeals, 2nd District, 1993 Download
94 Johnson v. State 602 So. 2d 1288 Supreme Court of Florida, 1992 Download
106 State v. Miranda 260 Conn. 93 Supreme Court of Connecticut, 2002
102 Kolender v. Lawson 461 U.S. 352 Supreme Court of the United States, 1983
112 Goldschmitt v. State 490 So. 2d 123 Court of Appeals of Florida, Second District, 1986
114 Coker v. Georgia 433 U.S. 584 Supreme Court of the United States, 1977 Download
119 Solem v. Helm 463 U.S. 277 Supreme Court of the United States, 1983
128 Kilbride v. Lake N.Z. L. Rev. 590 Supreme Court of New Zealand, 1961
133 State v. Hinkle 200 W. Va. 280 Supreme Court of Appeals of West Virginia, 1996 Download
137 Commonwealth v. Pestinikas 421 Pa. Super. 371 Superior Court of Pennsylvania, 1992
146 People v. Valot 33 Mich. App. 49 Michigan Court of Appeals, 1971
149 Commonwealth v. Buckley 354 Mass. 508 Supreme Judicial Court of Massachusetts, 1968
157 State v. Smith 262 N.J. Super. 487 Superior Court of New Jersey, Appellate Division, 1993
165 Fabritz v. Traurig 583 F.2d 697 U.S. Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit, 1978 Download
169 United States v. International Minerals & Chemical Corp 402 U.S. 558 Supreme Court of the United States, 1971
174 United States v. Sanchez-Robles 927 F.2d 1070 United States Court of Appeals, 9th Circuit, 1991
178 United States v. Bailey 444 U.S. 394 Supreme Court of the United States
189 State v. Cushman 133 Vt. 121 Supreme Court of Vermont
190 Commonwealth v. Mitchell 41 S. W. 3d 434 Supreme Court of Kentucky, 2001
192 People v. Howk 56 Cal. 2d 687 Supreme Court of California, 1961
194 State v. Goff 297 Or. 635 Supreme Court of Oregon, 1984
199 United States v. Short 4 USCMA 437 United States Court of Military Appeals, 1954
202 United States v. Mancuso 420 F.2d 556 United States Court of Appeals, Second Circuit, 1970
205 United States v. Clegg 846 F.2d 1221 United States Court of Appeals, 9th Circuit, 1988
207 Commonwealth v. Twitchell 416 Mass. 114 Supreme Judicial Court of Massachusetts, 1993
217 State v. Miller 192 Or. 188, 233 P.2d 786 Supreme Court of Oregon, 1951 Download
219 Davis v. City of Peachtree City 251 Ga. 219 Supreme Court of Georgia, 1983
221 State v. Zeta Chi Fraternity 696 A.2d 530 Supreme Court of New Hampshire, 1997
226 Standefer v. United States 447 U.S. 10 United States Supreme Court, 1980
236 Commonwealth v. Feinberg 433 Pa. 558 Supreme Court of Pennsylvania, 1969
240 United States v. Garguilo 310 F.2d 249 United States Court of Appeals, Second Circuit, 1962
245 United States v. Kelley 769 F.2d 215 United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit, 1985
249 People v. Poplar 20 Mich. App. 132 Court of Appeals of Michigan, 1969
252 State v. Thomas 140 N.J. Super. 429 Superior Court of New Jersey, Appellate Division, 1976
255 Regina v. Tyrell 17 Cox Crim. Cas. 716 Court for Crown Cases Reserved, 1893
258 People v. Duty 269 Cal. App. 2d 97 California Court of Appeal, 1969
272 Thompson v. State 94 Ala. 535 Supreme Court of Alabama, 1892
273 People v. Olivo 52 N.Y.2d 309 Court of Appeals of New York, 1981
277 People v. Rivera 141 Ill. 2d 528 Supreme Court of Illinois, 1990
278 Caruso v. State 205 Tenn. 211 Supreme Court of Tennessee, 1958
280 People v. Lopez 118 Cal. Rptr. 2d 539 California Court of Appeals, 2002
284 State v. Cohen 196 Minn. 39 Supreme Court of Minnesota, 1935
286 State v. Boisvert 236 A.2d 419 Supreme Judicial Court of Maine, 1967
287 Chadwell v. State 37 Ark. App. 9 Court of Appeals of Arkansas, 1992
288 State v. McGraw 480 N.E.2d 552 Supreme Court of Indiana, 1985
291 People v. Tufunga 21 Cal. 4th 935 Supreme Court of California, 1999
298 Brown v. Commonwealth 656 S.W.2d 727 Supreme Court of Kentucky, 1983
300 State v. Clermont 9 Or. App. 141 Court of Appeals of Oregon
302 People v. Whight 36 Cal. App. 4th 1143 California Court of Appeals
305 Briggs v. State 3 Tenn. Crim. App. 471 Court of Criminal Appeals of Tennessee
307 Batin v. State 38 P.3d 880 Supreme Court of Nevada, 2002
311 State v. Sein 124 N.J. 209 Supreme Court of New Jersey Download
315 State v. Greenspan 92 N.C. App. 563 Court of Appeals fo North Carolina
318 State v. Neely 582 S.W.2d 352 Missouri Court of Appeals, 1979
320 People v. Tragni 113 Misc. 2d 852 Supreme Court, New York County, Part 71
324 People v. Martinez 95 Cal. App. 4th 581 California Court of Appeal, Fourth District, 2002
327 People v. Iniguez 872 P.2d 1183 ; 7 Cal. 4th 847 Supreme Court of California, 1994 Download
333 Commonwealth v. Caracciola 409 Mass. 648 Supreme Judicial Court of Massachusetts, 1991
336 Commonwealth v. Lopez 433 Mass. 722 Supreme Judicial Court of Massachusetts, 2001
341 State v. Robinson 496 A.2d 1067 Supreme Judicial Court of Maine, 1985
346 Ledbetter v. State 184 Tenn. 396 Supreme Court of Tennessee, 1947
349 People v. Hernandez 61 Cal. 2d 529 Supreme Court of California
352 People v. Murphy 919 P.2d 191 Supreme Court of Colorado, 1996
356 Doe v. Duling 603 F. Supp. 960 United States District Court, Eastern District Virginia
360 Commonwealth v. Dodge 287 Pa. Super. 148 Superior Court of pennsylvania, 1981
365 State v. Kittilstad 231 Wis. 2d 245 Supreme Court of Wisconsin
372 State v. Fierro 124 Ariz. 182 Supreme Court of Arizona
385 Vacco v. Quill 521 U.S. 793 Supreme Court of the United States
399 State v. Myers 7 N.J. 465 Supreme Court of New Jersey
403 State v. Thompson 578 So. 2d 1151 Court of Appeal of Louisiana, 1991
406 People v. Geiger 10 Mich. App. 339 Court of Appeals of Michigan, 1968
409 Brinkley v. State 233 A.2d 56 Supreme Court of Delaware, 1967
413 State v. Hemphill 104 N.C. App. 431 Court of Appeals of North Carolina
419 State v. Chambers 524 S.W.2d 826 Supreme Court of Missouri, 1975
425 State v. Thompson 88 Wash. 2d 13 Supreme Court of Washington
429 People v. Johnson 7 Cal. Rptr. 2d 23 Court of Appeal of California, 1992
435 State v. Maudlin 215 Kan. 956 Supreme Court of Kansas
439 Jackson v. State 286 Md. 430 Court of Appeals of Maryland
447 People v. Aaron 299 N.W. 2d 304 (1980) Supreme Court of Michigan Download
Case Information Fact Summary Rule of Law
United States v. Jackson
United States Court of Appeals, 7th Circuit, 1987
835 F.2d 1195
Pg. 48 		Thirty minutes after being released from prison Mr. Jackson robbed another bank. Mr. Jackson was captured shortly thereafter and returned to jail. His principle sentence came under 18 U.S.C. section 1202, which forbids the possession of weapons by career criminals. Under the provisions of section 1202 Mr. Jackson was sentenced to life in prison without the possibility of parole. Mr. Jackson appealed the sentence. The statute reflects a judgment that career criminals should be dealt with most severely, thus the imposition of life in prison without parole on Mr. Jackson was permissible under the statute.
Bowers v. Hardwick
Supreme Court of the United States, 1986
478 U.S. 186
Pg. 19 		"After being charged with violating the Georgia statute criminalizing sodomy by committing that act with another adult male in the bedroom of his home, respondent Hardwick (respondent) brought suit in Federal District Court, challenging the constitutionality of the statute insofar as it criminalized consensual sodomy. The court granted the defendants' motion to dismiss for failure to state a claim. The Court of Appeals reversed and remanded, holding that the Georgia statute violated respondent's fundamental rights." Morality provides a rational basis for a law.
Robinson v. California
Supreme Court of the United States, 1962
370 U.S. 660
Pg. 58 		Defendant was convicted of being addicted to narcotics after two police officers witnessed scar tissue and needle marks on his forearm. The court held that the California statute making addiction to narcotics a crime violated the Constitution because it was a cruel and unusual punishment.
Powell v. Texas
Supreme Court of the United States, 1968
392 U.S. 514
Pg. 62 		Defendant was convicted under a Texas Statute prohibiting public drunkeness. Defendant claimed that he could not help being drunk due to his alcoholism, and that to punish him for being an addict was a violation of his constitutional rights. Court held that it was not a violation of defendant's constitutional rights because he wasn't being punished for being drunk, but for being drunk in a public place.
Morissette v. United States
Supreme Court of the United States, 1952
342 U.S. 246
Pg. 89 		A junk dealer took bomb casings, which had been laying in the open and were rusting, from an Air Force bombing range. Strict liability does not apply where the offense is not a public welfare offense.
People v. Campbell
Court of Appeals of Michigan, 1983
124 Mich. App. 333, 335 N.W.2d 27
Pg. 141 		Defendant caught his wife sleeping with Basnaw, the deceased. Two weeks later, while drinking heavily, defendant and Basnaw began discussing suicide. After encouraging Basnaw to kill himself, defendant got him a gun and bullets. Basnaw commited suicide after defendant left his house. Defendant was charged with "open murder" for inciting suicide. "The term suicide excludes by definition homicide," therefore giving a person a gun to kill himself with is not murder. The defendant must have the present intention to kill to commit murder; "...hope alone is not the degree of intention requisite to a charge of murder."
Lambert v. California
Supreme Court of the United States, 1957
355 U.S. 225
Pg. 142 		Defendant, a felon, was convicted of failing to register pursuant to a California statute requiring registration. Knowledge or probability of knowledge of a statute is generally required to convict someone of a notice offense.
People v. Hood
Supreme Court of California, 1969
1 Cal. 3d 444, 462 P.2d 370
Pg. 161 		Defendant, while resisting arrest, grabbed the officer's gun and shot the officer twice in the leg. He was convicted of assault with a deadly weapon of a peace officer. The trial court gave hopelessly conflicting instructions on the effect of intoxication resulting in an appeal. The court held that on re-trial the court should not instruct the jury to consider evidence of defendant's intoxication in determining whether he committed the crime.
Commonwealth v. Welansky
Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court, 1944
316 Mass. 383, 55 N.E.2d 902
Pg. 182 		The Cocoanut Grove - a Boston night club - was overcrowded after a football game on November 28, 1942. A fire broke out in the night club and because of the dimensions of the club and the lack of available exits, a great number of people died. Although Welanski (the club's proprietor) was not present at the club when the fire broke out, he was still found guilty of involuntary manslaughter. In determining whether civil or criminal liability exists for unintended homicide the Court considers (1) a higher liklihood of harm; (2) risk of a particularly serious harm; and (3) actual awareness, or greater liklihood of awareness, of that harm.
Staples v. United States
Supreme Court of the United States, 1994
511 U.S. 600
Pg. 212 		Defendant failed to register his firearm. The defendant didn't know that his firearm had been altered, making it a semi-automatic weapon and rendering it subject to the statute under which he was prosecuted. Although a statute doesn't mention a mens rea requirement, the Court will impute mens rea to the offense.
State v. Gladstone
Supreme Court of Washington, 1980
78 Wash. 2d 306, 474 P.2d 274
Pg. 230 		Undercover police officer went to defendant's home looking to buy marijuana. The defendant did not have any marijuana, but offered the name of someone who did have marijuana. There must be a nexus between the individual accused and the party whom he is charged with aiding and abetting in the commission of a crime.
Topolewski v. State
Supreme Court of Wisconsin, 1906
130 Wis. 244, 109 N.W. 1037
Pg. 263 		The accused arranged to have an employee of the Plankinton Packing Company place three barrels of the company's meat on the loading platform, the plan being that the accused would load the barrels on his wagon and drive away as if he were a customer. The employee notified the company of the plan. Accused then took the barrels as planned and was arrested. Where the owner of the property by himself or through his agent, actually or constructively, aids in the commission of the offense the would-be criminal cannot be found guilty on all the elements of the offense.
Hufstetler v. State
Alabama Court of Appeals, 1953
37 Ala. App. 71, 63 So. 2d 730
Pg. 270 		Defendant was convicted of petit larceny for stealing 6 1/2 gallons of gasoline. Defendant asked for some gasoline at a service station. After the attendant filled up the car, the defendant then asked for some oil. While the attendant was getting the oil, the defendant took off without paying for the gasoline. The defendant argued that the service station attendant voluntarily parted with the gasoline. The service station attendant had no intention of parting with the gasoline without being paid, thus the attendant did not voluntarily part with the gasoline and the conviction should be sustained.
Washington v. Glucksberg
Supreme Court of the United States, 1997
521 U.S. 702
Pg. 377 		Several terminally ill patients and their physicians sued the State of Washington for a declaratory judgment that the state's ban on assisted suicide was a violation of a fundamental right protected by the Due Process Clause of the Constitution. Washington's prohibition against "caus[ing]" or "aid[ing]" a suicide does not violate the Due Process Clause.
Keeler v. Superior Court
Supreme Court of California, 1970
470 P.2d 617
Pg. 390 		Petitioner put his knee into the stomach of Mrs. Keeler, who was pregnant at the time, in an effort to stomp the fetus out of her. The trauma crushed the skull of the fetus causing it to be delivered stillborn. The issue put before the court was whether petitioner could be tried for murder. The court issued a peremptory writ of prohibition restraining the trial court from proceeding with prosecution for murder because an unborn fetus was not a human being within the meaning of California's murder statute.
Commonwealth v. Root
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania, 1961
403 Pa. 571, 170 A.2d 310
Pg. 509 		Defendant was racing the decedent on a public road. While in a no-passing zone, the decedent attempted to pass the defendant in the left lane, where traffic was traveling in the opposite direction. The decedent's car was struck by an on-coming truck, and was killed. Defendant was convicted on involuntary manslaughter. To convict a defendant of manslaughter, his conduct must be both reckless and a sufficiently direct cause of the death of another.
People v. Dlugash
New York Court of Appeals, 1977
41 N.Y.2d 725, 363 N.E.2d 1155
Pg. 585 		Defendant shot the victim in the head five times, a few minutes after the victim had already been shot in the chest twice. Defendant claimed that he thought the victim was already dead. There was medical testimony that the victim may have still been alive when he was shot by defendant. "... A person is guilty of an attempt when, with intent to commit a crime, he engages in conduct which tends to effect the commission of such crime. It is no defense that, under the attendant circumstances, the crime was factually or legally impossible of commission, 'if such crime could have been committed had the attendant circumstances been as such person believed them to be.' Thus, if defendant believed the victim to be alive at the time of the shooting, it is no defense to the charge of attempted murder that the victim may have been dead."
Pinkerton v. United States
Supreme Court of the United States, 1946
328 U.S. 640
Pg. 639 		Two brothers were indicted for violations of the Internal Revenue Code. There was no evidence to support the conviction of one of the brothers on the substantive offense. An overt act of one partner may be the act of all without any new agreement specifically directed to that act. Motive or intent may be proved by the acts or declarations of some of the conspirators in furtherance of the common objective.
People v. Goetz
New York Court of Appeals, 1986
68 N.Y.2d 96, 497 N.E.2d 41
Pg. 649 		Defendant was approached by 4 youths on a subway car. The youths demanded money from defendant. Fearing that he was about to be robbed, defendant decided to shoot each youth with an unregistered handgun he had with him to fend off muggers. A grand jury indicted defendant on 4 charges of attempted murder. Defendant challenged the prosecutors charge to the grand jury on the defense of justification. In New York, whether a defendant is justified in killing another is determined by an objective, or "reasonable man", standard, not a subjective standard; whether the actions of the defendant were reasonable is "based on the circumstances facing a defendant or his situation..."
People v. Ceballos
Supreme Court of California, 1974
12 Cal. 3d 470, 526 P.2d 241
Pg. 703 		Defendant set up a spring gun to protect his garage from intruders after some of his property had been stolen. Two teenagers subsequently tried to break into his garage, whereupon one was shot in the face. "Where the character and manner of [a] burglary [does] not reasonably create a fear of great bodily harm [or death], there is no cause for exaction of human life." Where no one but the alleged burglar is on the premises, there is no fear of great bodily harm or death.
Tennessee v. Garner
Supreme Court of the United States, 1985
471 U.S. 1
Pg. 708 		A policeman shot and killed a suspect that was fleeing from the scene of a buglary after ordering him to halt. The suspect was a minor, had a slight build, and was not armed. The policeman shot the suspect solely to prevent him from escaping. A police officer may not use deadly force against a fleeing felony suspect unless he has probable cause to believe that the suspect poses a threat of serious physical harm to the officer or others.
M'Naghten's Case
House of Lords, 1843
10 Cl. & F. 200, 8 Eng. Rep. 718
Pg. 784 		A Scottish woodsman murdered an Englishman while suffering paranoid delusions. The M'Naghten rule states that to be legally insane the defendant must have either (1) not known what he/she was doing at the time; or (2) not known that what he/she was doing was wrong. One illustration of this would be if someone thought they were squeezing a lemon, when in fact they were squeezing someone's head.
United States v. Brawner
United States Court of Appeals, District of Columbia Circuit, 1972
471 F.2d 969
Pg. 800 		After examining the test of legal insanity as a complete defense, the court considered whether mental health evidence should be admissible apart from its bearing on the insanity issue. The court found a rule that permits the introduction of expert testimony as to abnormal conditions if it is relevant to negate, or establish the specific mental condition that is an element of the crime.
Regina v. Dudley and Stephens
Queen's Bench Division, 1884
14 Q.B.D. 273
Pg. 39 		Several men went sailing and were caught in a storm and pushed out to sea. After days without food, two of the men decided to eat the cabin boy. Extreme hunger does not justify murder and is therefore punishable.
Commonwealth v. Wasson
Supreme Court of Kentucky, 1992
842 S.W.2d 487
Pg. 27 		Appellee was arrested for soliciting "deviant sexual intercourse from an undercover police officer "Deviant sexual intercourse with another person of the same sex" is a criminal offense in Kentucky, irrespective of whether it was consensual or whether it involved a commercial transaction. Appellee challenged the law under the Kentucky Constitution. "...The guarantees of individual liberty provided in our 1891 Kentucky Constitution offer greater protection of the right of privacy than provided by the Federal constitution as interpreted by the United States Supreme Court, and that the statute in question is a violation of such rights; and, further, we hold that the statute in question violates rights of equal protection a guaranteed by our Kentucky Constitution."
Griswold v. Connecticut
Supreme Court of the United States, 1965
381 U.S. 479
Pg. 15 		A gynecologist and educator opened a birth control clinic in Connecticut, even though at the time, it was illegal to use any drug, instrument, or device to avoid contraception. They were arrested, tried, and convicted. The appellate courts affirmed the conviction. This was, however, part of a plan to put the question in front of the United States Supreme Court. The right to marital privacy is not under a federal rule per se, but falls under the penumbra of the Bill Rights, such that it can be inferred that married couples have the right to use contraception because it is a private choice between persons of a private household.
D.P. v. State
District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District, 1997
705 So. 2d 593, cert. denied, 525 U.S. 1028
Pg. 5
Commonwealth v. Jones
Supreme Court of Kentucky, 1994
880 S.W.2d 544
Pg. 1 		While attending a parade, defendant repeatedly yells obscenities at members of the procession. State convicts defendant under state statute for disorderly conduct. A statute may criminalize the VOLUME of speech, but "the CONTENT of the noise, however distasteful, is not punishable."
Weishaupt v. Commonwealth
Supreme Court of Virginia, 1984
227 Va. 389, 315 S.E.2d 847
Pg. 76
State v. Palendrano
Superior Court of New Jersey, 1972
120 N.J. Super. 336, 293 A.2d 747
Pg. 72 		Defendant is charged with being a Common Scold in relation to an disturbance also giving rise to charges of assault and battery and threatening to take the life of another. "A Common Scold is a troublesome and angry woman, who, by brawling and wrangling among her neighbors, breaks the public peace, increases discord, and becomes a nuisance to the neighborhood. At common law, common brawler or common scold meant a person of an habitually quarrelsome, noisy, and wrangling nature, although brawler denoted something harsher than scold, namely anger, loud outcries and tumult." Though it was a crime at common law, being a Common Scold is no longer a crime in New Jersey under the statutory disorderly persons offense. A criminal enactment is void for vagueness if its prohibitions are not clearly defined. A criminal enactment must satisfy the Equal Protection clause of the 14th amendment: a law cannot prohibit conduct of a woman that is not also prohibited of a man.
Regina v. Jones
Ontario Court of Appeal, 1956
115 Can. Crim. Cases 273
Pg. 36 		Defendant indecently assaulted 3 young girls. He is given a $450 fine and no imprisonment by the magistrate. Both the rehabilitation of the offender and deterrence to others must be taken into account in sentencing. Incarceration may be appropriate to deter others, even if it would not deter the defendant being sentenced.
State v. Mortimer
Court of Appeals of North Carolina, 2001
142 N.C. App. 321, 542 S.E.2d 330
Pg. 10 		High school student (defendant) creates a screen saver that says, "The End is Near." Due to the emotional aftermath of the Columbine high school shootings, the principal brings charge "communicating threats" against defendant. If state is unable to present evidence that defendant WILLFULLY INTENDED to threaten others, then defendant shall not be criminally liable for the crime of communicating threats.
United States v. Reid
United States District Court, D. Mass., 2002
206 F. Supp. 2d 132
Pg. 83 		Defendant Reid attempted to detonate an explosive device hidden in his shoe while on an international commerical airplane flight. An indictment under a criminal statute cannot stand unless the conduct is within the scope prohibited by the statute. While section 1993 proscribes attempts, and an airplane is engaged in "mass transportation", an airplane is not a "vehicle" within the scope of section 1993, according to the definition used by Congress.
People v. Turner
Illinois Court of Appeals, 2nd District, 1993
249 Ill. App. 3d 474, 619 N.E.2d 781
Pg. 98 		Defendants left their two children, aged nine and two, in their car while they went to work because the could not find anyone to look after them. It was unclear whether they could bring them into work, and they feared losing their jobs. The temperature was 21 degrees Fahrenheit. The children were left in for approximately three hours before they were found by the police. <em>Economic necessity is never a justification for criminal conduct. Reasonableness is incorporated into the concept of necessity. The meaning of language in a criminal statute is a question of law. Whether a defendant's conduct is unreasonable or unnecessary under the statutory definition is a question of fact</em>
Johnson v. State
Supreme Court of Florida, 1992
602 So. 2d 1288
Pg. 94 		Pregnant mother uses cocaine in the hours leading up to her pregnancy. She is prosecuted for delivering a controlled substance to a minor, under the theory that she delivered cocaine and its by-products through the umbilical cord in the 60-90 seconds between the birth and the severance of the umbilical cord. Courts must apply the rule of lenity: when statutory language "is susceptible to differing constructions, [the statute] shall be construed most favorable to the accused. The legislative intent must show a "manifest intent" to criminalize behavior.
State v. Miranda
Supreme Court of Connecticut, 2002
260 Conn. 93
Pg. 106
Kolender v. Lawson
Supreme Court of the United States, 1983
461 U.S. 352
Pg. 102
Goldschmitt v. State
Court of Appeals of Florida, Second District, 1986
490 So. 2d 123
Pg. 112
Coker v. Georgia
Supreme Court of the United States, 1977
433 U.S. 584
Pg. 114 		Petitioner escaped from prison and broke into the home of a husband and wife. He then robbed the husband and raped the wife while brandishing a knife. Petitioner was apprehended and sentenced to death by a jury under Georgia law. The Eighth Amendment to the Constitution prohibits the death penalty for the crime of rape of an adult woman. Regardless of the aggravated circumstances surrounding the rape, capital punishment is disproportionate.
Solem v. Helm
Supreme Court of the United States, 1983
463 U.S. 277
Pg. 119
Kilbride v. Lake
Supreme Court of New Zealand, 1961
N.Z. L. Rev. 590
Pg. 128
State v. Hinkle
Supreme Court of Appeals of West Virginia, 1996
200 W. Va. 280
Pg. 133 		Hinkle (Defendant) went to a bar after work and had a drink. He complained of dizziness and a bar staff member took him to his car. On his drive home, Defendant crossed over into opposing traffic and struck another vehicle, killing the driver. It was later revealed that Defendant had an undiagnosed brain condition and had a blood alcohol content below the legal limit. Defendant appealed a conviction of involuntary manslaughter claiming that the trial court erred in not providing an insanity instruction to the jury. Involuntary unconsciousness, like insanity, eliminates and is a defense to the voluntariness element of a crime.
Commonwealth v. Pestinikas
Superior Court of Pennsylvania, 1992
421 Pa. Super. 371
Pg. 137
People v. Valot
Michigan Court of Appeals, 1971
33 Mich. App. 49
Pg. 146
Commonwealth v. Buckley
Supreme Judicial Court of Massachusetts, 1968
354 Mass. 508
Pg. 149
State v. Smith
Superior Court of New Jersey, Appellate Division, 1993
262 N.J. Super. 487
Pg. 157
Fabritz v. Traurig
U.S. Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit, 1978
583 F.2d 697
Pg. 165 		Mother leaves her 3-year old daughter in the care of a married couple whom she lives with while attending her grandfather's funeral. Upon returning from the funeral, mother discovers that daughter has numerous bruises and flu-like symptoms. After spending many hours attempting to treat the symptoms, and after asking for help from her neighbor, the mother decides to take her daughter to the hospital, but the daughter stops breathing before she can do so. The daughter is pronounced dead on arrival, and the mother is charged with child abuse by delayed medical attention. There must be some evidence of "consciousness of criminality" for a conviction to stand; Defendant must have "knowledge that she was risking the life of her child."
United States v. International Minerals & Chemical Corp
Supreme Court of the United States, 1971
402 U.S. 558
Pg. 169
United States v. Sanchez-Robles
United States Court of Appeals, 9th Circuit, 1991
927 F.2d 1070
Pg. 174
United States v. Bailey
Supreme Court of the United States
444 U.S. 394
Pg. 178
State v. Cushman
Supreme Court of Vermont
133 Vt. 121
Pg. 189
Commonwealth v. Mitchell
Supreme Court of Kentucky, 2001
41 S. W. 3d 434
Pg. 190
People v. Howk
Supreme Court of California, 1961
56 Cal. 2d 687
Pg. 192
State v. Goff
Supreme Court of Oregon, 1984
297 Or. 635
Pg. 194
United States v. Short
United States Court of Military Appeals, 1954
4 USCMA 437
Pg. 199
United States v. Mancuso
United States Court of Appeals, Second Circuit, 1970
420 F.2d 556
Pg. 202
United States v. Clegg
United States Court of Appeals, 9th Circuit, 1988
846 F.2d 1221
Pg. 205
Commonwealth v. Twitchell
Supreme Judicial Court of Massachusetts, 1993
416 Mass. 114
Pg. 207
State v. Miller
Supreme Court of Oregon, 1951
192 Or. 188, 233 P.2d 786
Pg. 217 		Defendant induced complaining witness to agree to guarantee his indebtedness to another on his false representation that he owned a tractor free of encumbrance. He was convicted of obtaining property by false pretenses. The provisions of statute which make unlawful the obtaining of the signature of any person with intent to defraud, and the making of a bill of sale or assignment or mortgage of personal property for the purpose of obtaining credit or to secure existing indebtedness, indicate that such an intangible thing as credit was not considered by the legislature to be property. Thus, the conviction should be reversed because the indictment does not allege a crime.
Davis v. City of Peachtree City
Supreme Court of Georgia, 1983
251 Ga. 219
Pg. 219
State v. Zeta Chi Fraternity
Supreme Court of New Hampshire, 1997
696 A.2d 530
Pg. 221
Standefer v. United States
United States Supreme Court, 1980
447 U.S. 10
Pg. 226
Commonwealth v. Feinberg
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania, 1969
433 Pa. 558
Pg. 236
United States v. Garguilo
United States Court of Appeals, Second Circuit, 1962
310 F.2d 249
Pg. 240
United States v. Kelley
United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit, 1985
769 F.2d 215
Pg. 245
People v. Poplar
Court of Appeals of Michigan, 1969
20 Mich. App. 132
Pg. 249
State v. Thomas
Superior Court of New Jersey, Appellate Division, 1976
140 N.J. Super. 429
Pg. 252
Regina v. Tyrell
Court for Crown Cases Reserved, 1893
17 Cox Crim. Cas. 716
Pg. 255
People v. Duty
California Court of Appeal, 1969
269 Cal. App. 2d 97
Pg. 258
Thompson v. State
Supreme Court of Alabama, 1892
94 Ala. 535
Pg. 272
People v. Olivo
Court of Appeals of New York, 1981
52 N.Y.2d 309
Pg. 273
People v. Rivera
Supreme Court of Illinois, 1990
141 Ill. 2d 528
Pg. 277
Caruso v. State
Supreme Court of Tennessee, 1958
205 Tenn. 211
Pg. 278
People v. Lopez
California Court of Appeals, 2002
118 Cal. Rptr. 2d 539
Pg. 280
State v. Cohen
Supreme Court of Minnesota, 1935
196 Minn. 39
Pg. 284
State v. Boisvert
Supreme Judicial Court of Maine, 1967
236 A.2d 419
Pg. 286
Chadwell v. State
Court of Appeals of Arkansas, 1992
37 Ark. App. 9
Pg. 287
State v. McGraw
Supreme Court of Indiana, 1985
480 N.E.2d 552
Pg. 288
People v. Tufunga
Supreme Court of California, 1999
21 Cal. 4th 935
Pg. 291
Brown v. Commonwealth
Supreme Court of Kentucky, 1983
656 S.W.2d 727
Pg. 298
State v. Clermont
Court of Appeals of Oregon
9 Or. App. 141
Pg. 300
People v. Whight
California Court of Appeals
36 Cal. App. 4th 1143
Pg. 302
Briggs v. State
Court of Criminal Appeals of Tennessee
3 Tenn. Crim. App. 471
Pg. 305
Batin v. State
Supreme Court of Nevada, 2002
38 P.3d 880
Pg. 307
State v. Sein
Supreme Court of New Jersey
124 N.J. 209
Pg. 311 		The narrow issue on this appeal, here by certification granted, is whether the sudden snatching of a purse from the grasp of its owner involves enough force to elevate the offense from theft from the person to robbery. The appellant had snatched a purse, without a struggle, from a woman in the street. The court concluded that defendant's conduct did not involve the type of force envisioned when the Legislature amended the robbery statute.
State v. Greenspan
Court of Appeals fo North Carolina
92 N.C. App. 563
Pg. 315
State v. Neely
Missouri Court of Appeals, 1979
582 S.W.2d 352
Pg. 318
People v. Tragni
Supreme Court, New York County, Part 71
113 Misc. 2d 852
Pg. 320
People v. Martinez
California Court of Appeal, Fourth District, 2002
95 Cal. App. 4th 581
Pg. 324
People v. Iniguez
Supreme Court of California, 1994
872 P.2d 1183 ; 7 Cal. 4th 847
Pg. 327 		Iniguez (Defendant) had consensual sex with a victim after sneaking into her room at night. The victim did not resist, claiming to be paralyzed by fear. Defendant was convicted of rape and the Court of Appeals reversed, stating that there was insufficient evidence supporting the fact that Defendant used force or intimidation in order to have sex with his victim. Rape is an act of sexual intercourse against the victim's will by means of force, violence, or fear of immediate and unlawful bodily injury on the victim. "The element of fear of immediate and unlawful bodily injury has two components, one subjective and one objective. The subjective component asks whether a victim genuinely entertained a fear of immediate and unlawful bodily injury sufficient to induce her to submit to sexual intercourse against her will. In order to satisfy this component, the extent or seriousness of the injury feared is immaterial."
Commonwealth v. Caracciola
Supreme Judicial Court of Massachusetts, 1991
409 Mass. 648
Pg. 333
Commonwealth v. Lopez
Supreme Judicial Court of Massachusetts, 2001
433 Mass. 722
Pg. 336
State v. Robinson
Supreme Judicial Court of Maine, 1985
496 A.2d 1067
Pg. 341
Ledbetter v. State
Supreme Court of Tennessee, 1947
184 Tenn. 396
Pg. 346
People v. Hernandez
Supreme Court of California
61 Cal. 2d 529
Pg. 349
People v. Murphy
Supreme Court of Colorado, 1996
919 P.2d 191
Pg. 352
Doe v. Duling
United States District Court, Eastern District Virginia
603 F. Supp. 960
Pg. 356
Commonwealth v. Dodge
Superior Court of pennsylvania, 1981
287 Pa. Super. 148
Pg. 360
State v. Kittilstad
Supreme Court of Wisconsin
231 Wis. 2d 245
Pg. 365
State v. Fierro
Supreme Court of Arizona
124 Ariz. 182
Pg. 372
Vacco v. Quill
Supreme Court of the United States
521 U.S. 793
Pg. 385
State v. Myers
Supreme Court of New Jersey
7 N.J. 465
Pg. 399
State v. Thompson
Court of Appeal of Louisiana, 1991
578 So. 2d 1151
Pg. 403
People v. Geiger
Court of Appeals of Michigan, 1968
10 Mich. App. 339
Pg. 406
Brinkley v. State
Supreme Court of Delaware, 1967
233 A.2d 56
Pg. 409
State v. Hemphill
Court of Appeals of North Carolina
104 N.C. App. 431
Pg. 413
State v. Chambers
Supreme Court of Missouri, 1975
524 S.W.2d 826
Pg. 419
State v. Thompson
Supreme Court of Washington
88 Wash. 2d 13
Pg. 425
People v. Johnson
Court of Appeal of California, 1992
7 Cal. Rptr. 2d 23
Pg. 429
State v. Maudlin
Supreme Court of Kansas
215 Kan. 956
Pg. 435
Jackson v. State
Court of Appeals of Maryland
286 Md. 430
Pg. 439
People v. Aaron
Supreme Court of Michigan
299 N.W. 2d 304 (1980)
Pg. 447 		Aaron (Defendant) was charged with and convicted of murder under the felony-murder rule after his commission of arson resulted in the death of two individuals. Defendant appealed arguing that the felony-murder rule should no longer be applied. In Michigan, the felony-murder rule is unnecessary and contrary to the fundamental principles of criminal law and is, therefore, no longer applied. According to the court, "it is no longer acceptable to equate the intent to commit a felony with the intent to kill, intent to do great bodily harm, or wanton and willful disregard of the likelihood that the natural tendency of a person's behavior is to cause death or great bodily harm."