Abstract
The numerous facets of criminal law in an English common law jurisdiction are examined in this article. The components of a criminal crime, types of criminal offenses, defendant defenses, criminal process, and newly developing criminal law topics are all covered. The article emphasizes the significance of men’s rea and actus reus in establishing criminal responsibility and the significance of causation in demonstrating the connection between the defendant’s acts and the damage produced. The importance of strict liability violations and their effects are also covered. The article continues by examining the many types of criminal acts, such as felonies, misdemeanors, and violations against people, property, and public order. It explores defenses, including the defense of insanity, self-defense, and error of law. The criminal procedure covers arrest, search, seizure, trial, key criminal justice players, punishment, and appeals. Technology, cybercrime, decriminalization, and criminal law ethics are all covered in the essay. This article thoroughly analyzes criminal law in an English common law jurisdiction, highlighting its significance and the necessity for ongoing modification to handle new problems.
Keywords: defense, criminal law, felonies, misdemeanors, violation, public order, self-defense, error of law, English common Law.
Introduction
With goals ranging from safeguarding principles of equity to preserving societal norms and making reparations for violations committed against them – the criminal justice system constructed by states like America can be construed as one possessing intricacies too numerous to name completely offhand. Among these complexities lies the prosecution’s process for facilitating charge reductions and decreased sentences via negotiated agreements, also known as ‘plea bargains .’Considering the framework of English common law jurisdiction in the U.S., numerous factors shall be scrutinized regarding plea bargaining, including its historical evolution and why certain debates exist.
Today, plea bargaining represents an aspect of every trial in most criminal cases. However, these deals were initially made primarily to reduce sentencing – not always to reduce charges brought against a defendant. The procedure has undergone many transformations since then, and stakeholders ranging from attorneys to civil rights advocates have raised concerns about how it influences participants’ access to fair justice under laws on the books.
In this essay, we analyze how plea bargaining has transformed into its current state in an English common law jurisdiction of America by exploring its historical progression, significance within the criminal justice structure, and ethical considerations. We intend to enrich existing dialogues regarding this contentious subject. We investigate the pros and cons of plea bargains while measuring potential impacts on defendant rights and effective implementation within our justice system. Our ultimate goal is to propose measures that prevent misconduct against ethics standards while enforcing fair treatment for the parties involved.
Criminal Law in a Common Law English Setting
A central tenet of any country’s legal framework is its approach to criminal justice; this holds for nations like America that rely on a “common” or traditional English-based legal system (LEIDER, 2021). Since its inception centuries ago, based on practices followed by judges presiding over courts across medieval England – influencing subsequent jurisdictions along the way – this body of work has maintained relevance worldwide even in contemporary times thanks to its sound foundations structuring doctrines governing many facets underpinning these structures for various modern-day societal contexts, especially in the criminal law realm.
American Common Law and English Common Law
Throughout many countries worldwide (including America), elements of English common law have helped shape national legal frameworks across several scenarios. The route towards establishing this approach began with court decisions and customs during medieval times throughout England; today, within America specifically, this plethora of precedents still carries weight – principally aiding them notably regarding criminal offenses (World Bank Group, 2022). From historic links between both jurisdictions arose a significant reliance on English common law via U.S.’U.S.’U.S.’ initial colonialization right up until modern-day efforts at implementing specific laws separate from that framework – although retaining that congruous character that is intrinsic, especially when dealing with any matters related to crime.
The Concepts and Organization of Criminal Law
The parts that make up the criminal law framework are all intended to define, control, and impose appropriate consequences for unlawful activity. These components are established on the principles of criminal law, which guarantee fairness, justice, and the defense of individual rights.
Criminal Offense Components
Men’s rea, the offender’s state of mind, and actus reus, or the deed itself, are often required to commission a crime. The actus reus includes the physical behavior that creates the crime, while the mental state refers to the defendant’s purpose or understanding of their acts (Garneau et al., 2021). Causation also links the defendant’s acts and the resulting damage.
Offense Classification
Criminal acts are assigned various degrees of seriousness, determining how they are classified within the justice system. This categorization consists of misdemeanors and felonies, where misdemeanor implies lower level mischief that may entail lesser punishment, whereas felony points toward major criminal misconduct whose consequences are significantly graver (Zufall et al., 2019). The severity of the crime is reflected in this categorization system, which aids in determining the appropriate sentence.
Criminal Law Principles
A vital element in our legal system is adhering to what we call “the rule of law.” It signifies that any conduct cannot result in punishment unless it is illegal by someone specific or everybody. Additionally, our society believes in “the presumption of innocence. ” which means judging someone guilty through evidence beyond a reasonable doubt. We believe they always remain blameless during trial proceedings (Chuasanga & Argo Victoria, 2019). Therefore, prosecutors must prove their case convincingly. Besides, the right to due process ensures a defendant’s access to a fair trial and legal representation. Ensuring court proceedings avoid involving evidence conducted under duress. A proportional penalty matches the gravity of the crime committed.
Historical Development of American Criminal Law
From English Common Law Until the Present, Criminal Law
English common law, which the early American colonies embraced, is the basis for American criminal law. However, due to cultural shifts, constitutional changes, and the establishment of unique legal doctrines, American criminal law has gradually drifted from its English origins. Under English common law precedent, it was established that all forms of theft, together with aggravated assaults or murders, are serious crimes punishable under the prevailing legal standards. Nevertheless, uncontrollable factors attached to city growth and the expanding economy created new modes of violations, necessitating a reconsideration vis-a-vis existing statute books (Entrikin, 2019). Therefore, an evolutionary process followed in which the judicial system instituted changes, adjusting old norms while tackling contemporary violations, e.g., money laundering, white-collar crime or organized gang activities à la. Mexican cartel operations have now become fully covered by modern-day security apparatus.
Important Laws and Judicial Rulings That Have Shaped Criminal Law
Constitutional Rights
Criminal law in the United States has been strongly impacted by including the Bill of Rights Fourth, Fifth, Sixth and Eighth Amendments in its Constitution. Protecting legal trials with fairness provisions, including due process, and avoiding arbitrary searches and seizures (Henkin, 2020). Preventing cruel treatment or the death penalty is not deemed reasonable for committed crimes; it ensures fundamental civil rights are upheld even through legal processes.
Arizona v. Miranda (1966)
The famous ruling of the Supreme Court, The Miranda warning, established an imperative dictating that police officers must remind people under apprehension about their constitutional liberties. This includes informing them about rights like staying mute and seeking legal guidance.
1984’s Sentencing Reform Act
This act established sentencing standards to lessen sentence inequalities and encourage uniformity in punishment. According to Berk et al. (2018), it developed a systematic framework for calculating punishments based on the crime’s seriousness and the offender’s characteristics. It formed the United States Sentencing Commission to offer recommendations for federal courts.
Three-Strike Laws
Beginning in the 1990s, numerous states passed “three strikes” legislation, which subjected anyone convicted of a third felony conviction to severe punishments, up to and including life imprisonment. According to Munich (n.d.), these rules have drawn criticism because they can potentially provide excessive punishments while being meant to discourage repeat criminals and safeguard communities.
Components of a Criminal Offense Under English Common Law
The Prerequisite for Mens Rea and Actus Reus
Men’s rea refers to the defendant’s state of mind when the crime was committed. It entails the responsible purpose, state of mind, or crime awareness. It includes the outward actions that make up the crime. The prosecution must demonstrate that the defendant took voluntary, intentional, and illegal activities to establish actus reus (Ausserladscheider Jonas, 2022). For instance, the actus reus in a theft case would be physically stealing another person’s property without their consent. Men’s rea and actus reus work together to guarantee that criminal culpability is based on the actual conduct of a banned act and the necessary culpable mental state rather than just ideas or intentions. Holding people responsible for their acts while considering their mental condition and moral responsibility helps maintain a balance.
The Connection Between the Defendant’s Behavior and The Damage Brought About
To prove criminal responsibility, causation is essential. It involves establishing a link between the defendant’s actions and the resulting damage. Factual causality and legal causation are the two facets of causation. It is necessary to prove that the defendant’s conduct caused the injury to establish factual causation (Bullock, 2022). It aims to ascertain if the injury would not have happened “but for” the defendant’s actions. Legal causation aids in ensuring that people are only held accountable for the outcomes of their conduct that were logically foreseeable.
Offenses with Strict Responsibility and Their Effects
While men’s rea and actus reus is often needed aspects of a crime, there are certain crimes known as strict liability crimes that do not need to show that the offender was in a guilty frame of mind. The crime is considered strictly liable if the actus reus is committed, independent of the defendant’s knowledge or purpose. Regulation-related or public welfare crimes, such as infractions of certain environmental laws or traffic laws, may entail strict liability offenses (Ausserladscheider Jonas, 2022). Strict responsibility crimes are intended to increase public safety, prevent possible injury, and make enforcement easier by removing the requirement to establish the defendant’s mental state.
Strict liability violations, however, create questions about equity and individual rights. Even if defendants used reasonable caution or were unaware that their activities were illegal, they may still be found criminally accountable. Courts often demand a high level of clarity in the law creating strict liability crimes and providing a few numbers of defenses, such as error of fact, to allay these concerns.
Criminal Offense Categories
Felonies and Misdemeanors
A fundamental perspective to recognize crimes versus misdeeds is understanding how extreme the direct was and appreciating accessible disciplines related to it. Typically, Felonies carry harsher punishments compared to minor infractions like misdemeanors. That being said. Offenses characterized as felonies might mean serving jail sentences exceeding one year or more, whereas those labeled as misdemeanors might lead to imprisonment not exceeding one calendar year (Thomas et al., 2022). Felons include murder, rape, robbery, and trafficking of illegal substances. These crimes often cause serious injury or loss and represent serious concerns to public safety. Misdemeanors include infractions including, simple assault, small theft, disorderly behavior, and drunk driving.
Offenses Against People, Including Murder, Assault, And Battery
Offenses against people entail damage to or threats to a person’s physical safety, sense of dignity, or individual liberties. These crimes are distinguished by the deliberate imposition of fear, dread of danger, or physical injury (Henderson, 2021). Assault, violence, murder, sexual assault, and abduction are prevalent crimes against people. Assault is the deliberate act of inciting dread or anxiety of impending offensive or harmful touch, even without actual contact. Contrarily, battery entails making unwanted physical contact with another person to cause hurt or offense. Negligent homicide, murder and manslaughter are all homicides with different levels of responsibility and intent.
Criminal Law Defenses
Requirements and Disagreements in The Insanity Defense
A notable guard in criminal regulation is the craziness safeguard, which contends that the litigant needed intellectual ability at the hour of the demonstration. Various circumstances should be fulfilled to utilize the madness protection appropriately (Ayres, 2020). These rules frequently incorporate exhibiting that the litigant misses the mark on the intellectual ability to see the value in the nature and ramifications of their demonstrations or to consent to the law because of psychological sickness or imperfection. The insanity defense is debatable and under investigation. Critics contend that wrongdoers might use it as an escape route to avoid accountability. There are disagreements about the best method for detecting insanity, and there are many options, including the M’Naghten rule, the irresistible impulse test, and the Model Penal Code norm.
Justification and Self-Defense
Justification and self-defense are two types of defenses that let someone use justifiable force to keep others safe or oneself from danger. Contrarily, justification permits using force when the defendant’s acts are required to stop bigger damage, such as defending other people’s lives. Applying the justification and self-defense defenses requires a comprehensive analysis of the situation, including the reasonableness of the defendant’s view and the appropriateness of their conduct (Lori et al.). These arguments establish a reasonable balance between protecting life and punishing wrongdoing.
Fact and Laws
The defenses of error of fact and mistake of law are used when the accused really and reasonably believed something was true or legal. When the defendant is wrong on a crucial fact connected to the crime, this is referred to as an error of fact. On the other hand, a legal error entails a misunderstanding or lack of knowledge of the law itself. These protections are sometimes accessible (Wilking, 2022). Generally speaking, a mistake of fact may be a good defense if it removes the offense’s necessary men’s rea or intent component. However, unless it results from official disinformation or a statute subsequently ruled illegal, a mistake of law is often not a defense.
Additional Common Defenses and Application
Criminal law also recognizes several more frequent defenses, including duress, entrapment, necessity, and consent. When a defendant behaves under duress, it usually relates to circumstances in which they were threatened or coerced and had to take immediate action to protect themselves. Entrapment occurs when law enforcement tricks someone into committing a crime the person would not have otherwise done. A necessity occurred when the defendant’s conduct was required to stop bigger damage. In deciding whether a defense is legitimate and capable of exonerating the offender from criminal responsibility, courts carefully consider the defense’s facts and arguments.
Emerging Problems in Criminal Law
The Influence of Technology On Crimes and Investigations
Innovation headways have, on a very basic level, changed how wrongdoings are carried out and explored. New sorts of wrongdoing have arisen because of the advanced time, including cybercrime, data fraud, and online misrepresentation. Hoodlums exploit openings in P.C.P.C.P.C. frameworks and organizations, which is challenging for policing (Brayne & Christin, 2020). Innovation has additionally changed how proof is assembled and investigated. Criminal examinations vigorously depend on computerized proof, like messages, virtual entertainment postings, and observation videos. However, acquiring, storing, and securing the validity of digital evidence in court offer special difficulties for law enforcement and the criminal justice system.
Challenges in Combating Cybercrime and Electronic Evidence
Due to its international scope and the anonymity that the internet affords, cybercrime poses particular difficulties. International collaboration is essential for efficient investigation and prosecution because perpetrators can operate from multiple countries. Law enforcement organizations must develop technical skills and promote global collaboration (Karagiannis & Vergidis, 2021). Criminal investigations become more difficult when using digital evidence. Its collection, preservation, and analysis need particular skills and methods. To keep up with the public’s trust in the law enforcement framework, guaranteeing the honesty and legitimacy of advanced evidence is vital. Getting to individuals’ computerized information likewise raises protection issues, requiring a fragile, difficult exercise between the requests of policing those of people.
Decriminalizing Certain Offenses
Reassessing the efficiency and justice of criminalizing certain actions is at the heart of the argument about their decriminalization. Certain content that alternative measures, such as treatment programs or civil fines, rather than criminal punishments, should be used to handle certain infractions, such as drug possession or minor offenses. According to Porter (2022), advocates contend that this strategy would lighten the load on the criminal justice system and direct resources to crimes of more seriousness. Decriminalization may jeopardize attempts to curb crime, according to opponents. According to them, criminalization offers a framework for addressing social damage and acts as a deterrent. The discussion highlights issues about the proper scope and bounds of criminal law and the need for a balanced strategy that considers both individual rights and public safety.
Ethical Issues in Criminal Justice
Criminal law has many purposes than only upholding the law. It also includes moral concerns, such as issues with justice, fairness, and striking a balance between one’s rights and those of society. Criminal law represents society’s ideals and works to uphold social order, prevent crime, and bring victims justice. Using force by police or correctional officers can create grave ethical questions within our criminal justice system. This includes not only physical force but also abuse of authority more generally. Concerning fair treatment for convicted persons accused or who plead guilty to such charges – along with what forms of treatment options they might access – social stability relies upon finding reasoned answers given arising despite many complex variables at all stages during this process. (Pollock, 2021) Properly balancing factors such as what form punishments ought to be given confronted by offenses committed alongside rehabilitating those same offenders proves essential yet difficult work.
Throughout this article, we have examined many facets of criminal law in an English common law jurisdiction. We discussed criminal offense components, categories, defendant defenses, criminal processes, and newly developing criminal law topics.
Conclusion
Our objective was crystal clear while discussing criminal offenses. We wanted everyone to understand the building blocks required to form such charges. These building blocks -men’s rea (mental intent), actus reus (the actual action), and causation (effect realized through action)- all play crucial roles while determining the charges faced by the accused. In addition, various types of laws ranging from minor violations(misdemeanors)to severe ones(felonies), were studied thoroughly. Hand in hand with this came the categories of crimes that exist today. These included violence against people/their private property and crimes that disrupt public order. It is essential to ensure that defendants have access to appropriate defenses. There is an array of popular defenses. Insanity pleas, Self-defense justification, and Mistakes related to fact/law were all examined in great detail. We covered arrest, search, and seizure, the duties of the police, prosecutors, and defense lawyers, the trial process, sentence, and appeals as we dug deep into the criminal procedure.
We discussed cutting-edge criminal law problems, such as how technology affects criminal crimes and investigations, how to deal with cybercrime and digital evidence, whether some offenses should be decriminalized, and how criminal law should be ethical. Criminal law is very important in a common law jurisdiction based in England. It is a cornerstone for upholding social order, defending individual liberties, and providing victim justice. The ideas and doctrines created during centuries of legal development provide a foundation for addressing criminal behavior and holding criminals responsible.
Criminal law must continue to adjust and develop in response to new issues. A proactive approach is required to combat cybercrime, safeguard digital privacy rights, and efficiently use digital evidence in criminal trials due to the fast evolution of technology. Legal experts, law enforcement organizations, and lawmakers must collaborate to create novel solutions and stay up with the constantly evolving panorama of criminal crimes. Additionally, the current discussion about decriminalizing certain crimes emphasizes the necessity for a sophisticated and impartial strategy. The future of criminal law must be shaped by analyzing the efficacy of criminalization, investigating alternative strategies, and considering the possible effects on individual rights and public safety. Such debates must be grounded on empirical study, professional judgment, and the fundamental principles of justice, fairness, and harm reduction.
In an English common law jurisdiction, criminal law is a fundamental component of the legal structure. It upholds fundamental justice values, safeguards individual liberties, and fosters societal harmony. Criminal law may change to meet changing social requirements while keeping core values by addressing new issues and having informed discussions. The pursuit of justice, protection of individual rights, and unshakable commitment to upholding a just and equitable legal system are all essential to the future of criminal law.
References
Ausserladscheider Jonas, L. (2022). Individual criminal responsibility for the financing of entities involved in core crimes. Brill Nijhoff.
Ayres, J. (2020). Defining Insanity: How an Individual’s View Can Impact a Trial. Pursuit – the Journal of Undergraduate Research at the University of Tennessee, 10(1). https://trace.tennessee.edu/pursuit/vol10/iss1/1/
Baker, J. H. (2019). An Introduction to English Legal History. In Google Books. Oxford University Press. https://books.google.co.ke/books?hl=en&lr=&id=0S0zEAAAQBAJ&oi=fnd&pg=PP1&dq=American+common+law+and+English+common+law&ots=XfX2MIcb5r&sig=U7aruDd_Dtm-pFuNP5wXsrHeC7E&redir_esc=y#v=onepage&q=American%20common%20law%20and%20English%20common%20law&f=false
Berk, R., Heidari, H., Jabbari, S., Kearns, M., & Roth, A. (2018). Fairness in Criminal Justice Risk Assessments. Sociological Methods & Research, 50(1), 004912411878253. https://doi.org/10.1177/0049124118782533
Brayne, S., & Christin, A. (2020). Technologies of Crime Prediction: The Reception of Algorithms in Policing and Criminal Courts. Social Problems, 68(3). https://doi.org/10.1093/socpro/spaa004
Bullock, D. (2022). Public Nuisance and Climate Change: The Common Law’s Solutions to the Plaintiff, Defendant and Causation Problems. The Modern Law Review. https://doi.org/10.1111/1468-2230.12732
Chuasanga, A., & Argo Victoria, O. (2019). Legal Principles Under Criminal Law in Indonesia Dan Thailand. Jurnal Daulat Hukum, 2(1), 131. https://doi.org/10.30659/jdh.v2i1.4218
Entrikin, J. L. (2019). The Death of Common Law. Harvard Journal of Law & Public Policy, 42, 351. https://heinonline.org/HOL/LandingPage?handle=hein.journals/hjlpp42&div=21&id=&page=
Garneau, N., Gaumond, E., Lamontagne, L., & Pierre-Luc Déziel. (2021). CriminelBART. https://doi.org/10.1145/3462757.3466147
Henderson, R. (2021). Assault (and Battery). Pressbooks.pub. https://pressbooks.pub/alaskacriminallaw2022/chapter/assault-and-battery/
Henkin, L. (2020). 11. Human Dignity and Constitutional Rights. 210–228. https://doi.org/10.7591/9781501737213-013
Karagiannis, C., & Vergidis, K. (2021). Digital Evidence and Cloud Forensics: Contemporary Legal Challenges and the Power of Disposal. Information, 12(5), 181. https://doi.org/10.3390/info12050181
LEIDER, R. (2021). THE MODERN COMMON LAW OF CRIME. The Journal of Criminal Law and Criminology (1973-), 111(2), 407–499. https://www.jstor.org/stable/48614944
Lori Fisler Damrosch. (n.d.). Law And Force In The New International Order. Routledge Uuuu-Uuuu.
Munich, C. (n.d.). UIC Law Review UIC Law Review TERMINATION OF PARENTAL RIGHTS: SHOULD THERE BE A “THREE-STRIKE RULE” FOR A PARENT TO LOSE PARENTAL RIGHTS AFTER THREE FELONY CONVICTIONS? Retrieved June 27, 2023, from https://repository.law.uic.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=2821&context=lawreview
Pollock, J. M. (2021). Ethical Dilemmas and Decisions in Criminal Justice. In Google Books. Cengage Learning. https://books.google.co.ke/books?hl=en&lr=&id=O5s5EAAAQBAJ&oi=fnd&pg=PP1&dq=+Ethical+Issues+in+Criminal+Justice&ots=BNH1rgb0_i&sig=qLQYjgi5ARsZWYTDSaC0BbO8xv0&redir_esc=y#v=onepage&q=Ethical%20Issues%20in%20Criminal%20Justice&f=false
Porter, N. (2022). Top Trends in Criminal Justice Reform, 2022. http://criminologie.org.ro/wp-content/uploads/2022/12/Porter_Top-Trends-in-Criminal-Justice-Reform-USA-2022.pdf
Thomas, C., Cadoff, B., Wolff, K. T., & Chauhan, P. (2022). How do the consequences of pretrial detention on guilty pleas and carceral sentences vary between misdemeanor and felony cases? Journal of Criminal Justice, 82, 102008. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcrimjus.2022.102008
Wilking, E. (2022). Independent Contractors in Law and in Fact: Evidence from U.S.U.S.U.S. Tax Returns. Northwestern Pritzker School of Law Scholarly Commons. https://scholarlycommons.law.northwestern.edu/nulr/vol117/iss3/3/
World Bank Group. (2022). Key Features of Common Law or Civil Law Systems | Public-private partnership. Worldbank.org. https://ppp.worldbank.org/public-private-partnership/legislation-regulation/framework-assessment/legal-systems/common-vs-civil-law
Zufall, F., Horsmann, T., & Zesch, T. (2019). From legal to technical concept: Towards an automated classification of. https://doi.org/10.18653/v1/n19-1135
write