The Experts below are selected from a list of 26064 Experts worldwide ranked by ideXlab platform
Franklin E. Zimring - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
The Unexamined Death Penalty: Capital Punishment and Reform of the Model Penal Code
Columbia Law Review, 2005Co-Authors: Franklin E. ZimringAbstract:The American Law Institute has launched a revision of its Model Penal Code provisions on sentencing and punishment that will be comprehensive in almost all respects. Conspicuously missing from the new sentencing project, however, is any examination of the Model Penal Code's provisions on capital punishment. This essay argues that a reexamination of capital punishment is both necessary and practical as part of the larger sentencing reform project. Avoiding the death Penalty is unprincipled and would leave the Model Code's single weakest section standing while every other sentencing provision would be subject to scrutiny. Failure to consider capital punishment would also ignore forty years of radical change in both the Penal policy of developed nations and the vocabulary of concern that had redefined the death Penalty as an issue of human rights and limits of government power. Ignoring the death Penalty would launch a reform effort that will ignore the punishment for murder while rethinking everything else. Nothing short of terror at the political cost can explain this retreat from the natural boundaries of sentencing reform. Yet fears of a principled reexamination of Section 210.6 are not well founded. The Institute could both take a principled position on the death Penalty itself and also recommend minimum standards for capital cases where the Penalty remains. To ignore the most visible and troubling aspect of American criminal justice is a much greater threat to the legitimacy of the Model Penal Code revision project than to confront it.
Markus D Dubber - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
an introduction to the model Penal Code
2015Co-Authors: Markus D DubberAbstract:Preface Acknowledgments Introduction 1 A Key to the Model Penal Code and to American Criminal Law 2 Origins: The ALI, Legal Process, and Treatmentism 2.1 Criminal Propensities 2.2 The Model Penal and Correctional Code 2.3 The Structure of the Model Penal Code 3 The Model Penal Code in a Nutshell: Section 1.02 3.1 The Prerequisites of Criminal Liability: Of Crimes and Criminals 3.2 The Analysis of Criminal Liability: Three Levels of Inquiry Chapter 1: Criminal Conduct 4 "Conduct" 4.1 Actus Reus (A) Act (B) Voluntariness (C) Omission (D) Possession 4.2 Mens Rea and Offense Elements (A) Element Types (B) The Mens Rea Requirement (C) Rules of Interpretation (D) Modes of Culpability (E) Matching Conduct to Offense 4.3 Intoxication and Mistake (A) Intoxication (B) Mistake 4.4 Liability for Another's Conduct (A) Instruments (B) Complicity (C) Corporations 5 "That Inflicts or Threatens" 5.1 Causation 5.2 Inchoate Offenses (A) Attempt (B) Conspiracy (C) Solicitation (D) Renunciation 6 "Substantial Harm to Individual or Public Interests" 6.1 Substantial Harm 6.2 Individual or Public Interests Chapter 2: Justification 7 Defenses in General 8 Necessity 9 Defense of Persons (Self and Others) and of Property 9.1 Self-Defense (A) Use of Force Upon or Toward Another Person (B) Belief (C) Necessity (D) Unlawfulness (E) Immediacy and Protection (F) Self- and Other-Defense 9.2 Defense of Property 9.3 Deadly Force 10 Law Enforcement 11 Consent Chapter 3: Excuse 12 Excuses in the Model Penal Code 13 Duress 14 Entrapment 15 Ignorance of Law 16 Provocation and Diminished Capacity 17 Insanity and Infancy Conclusion 18 Analysis of Criminal Liability Table of Cases Table of Model Penal Code Sections and Statutes Index
-
the model Penal Code legal process and the alegitimacy of american Penality
2013Co-Authors: Markus D DubberAbstract:The Model Penal Code, drafted under the auspices of Herbert Wechsler, is the most significant text in the history of American criminal law. Yet, in an important and revealing sense, it is not a foundational text in modern criminal law. What’s more, it is significant precisely because it is not foundational. In this essay, I try to capture the significance of the Model Penal Code — or to call it by its full name, the Model Penal and Correctional Code — by explaining why it is not foundational. Obviously, this is not going to be a taxonomical, or labeling, exercise, propelled by the desire to properly classify the Code. Classification is not the end, but the means. Much like the Model Penal Code’s distinction among, say, offense element types, it is only worth as much as the light it sheds, in this case on the history and complexion of American Penality and, with any luck, even on modern Penality in general, in other words, on the Model Penal Code’s, and therefore also Wechsler’s, significance in modern criminal law.
-
the american law institute s model Penal Code and european criminal law
Substantive Criminal Law of the European Union, 2011Co-Authors: Markus D DubberAbstract:It has been suggested that the American Law Institute’s Model Penal Code might serve as a model for a European Model Penal Code, or at least for the project of assembling general principles of European criminal law. This paper presents a critical analysis of the Model Penal Code project, paying particular attention to the form of the project, rather than its substance, on the assumption that the idea, and the drafting, of the Model Penal Code would be of greater interest to a European criminal law project than its content, a systematic and comprehensive general part and a representative special part of “American criminal law.”
-
The American Law Institute’s Model Penal Code and European Criminal Law
SSRN Electronic Journal, 2011Co-Authors: Markus D DubberAbstract:It has been suggested that the American Law Institute’s Model Penal Code might serve as a model for a European Model Penal Code, or at least for the project of assembling general principles of European criminal law. This paper presents a critical analysis of the Model Penal Code project, paying particular attention to the form of the project, rather than its substance, on the assumption that the idea, and the drafting, of the Model Penal Code would be of greater interest to a European criminal law project than its content, a systematic and comprehensive general part and a representative special part of “American criminal law.”
-
criminal law model Penal Code
2007Co-Authors: Markus D DubberAbstract:The Model Penal Code has been called the principal text in criminal law teaching. It is an ambitious, and influential, attempt to work out the principles of American criminal law in a systematic way. By highlighting the Code's conceptual structure, this study aid helps students to navigate the Code's complex provisions and helps teachers unlock its full pedagogic potential, one all too easily obscured by a fragmented discussion of Code sections dealing with a variety of topics. The appendix includes the text of the Model Penal Code, parts I & II.
Tobias Heinzelmann - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
The Ruler’s Monologue: The Rhetoric of the Ottoman Penal Code of 1858
Die Welt des Islams, 2014Co-Authors: Tobias HeinzelmannAbstract:The Penal Code of 1858 was an important step in Ottoman legislation during the reform period (tanẓīmāt) and had a considerable impact on the concept of the state as the guardian of public order. Through the 20th century the Penal Code of 1858 was generally interpreted as a “(literal) translation” of the French Code Penal of 1810 and as evidence for the “western influence” on Ottoman legislation. Recent research has started to question this interpretation, focussed more closely on the normative aspects of the Ottoman Penal Code and analysed the Penal Code of 1858 as an adaptation of French law within the context of the Ottoman legal concepts during the tanẓīmāt. In my article I analyse the text as a part of political communication, as a monologue by which the state adresses its subjects. Even if large parts of the Ottoman Penal Code are translations from the French, the rhetoric patterns and terminology have to be taken seriously. The amalgamation of traditional rhetorics and a new terminology turns out to be a successful strategy to legitimise new legal concepts, which include a new relation between ḳānūn and serīʿat. In my article I will argue that the state’s traditional role as the guardian of public order is the starting point for the introduction of these new legal concepts.
-
the ruler s monologue the rhetoric of the ottoman Penal Code of 1858
Die Welt des Islams, 2014Co-Authors: Tobias HeinzelmannAbstract:The Penal Code of 1858 was an important step in Ottoman legislation during the reform period (tanẓīmāt) and had a considerable impact on the concept of the state as the guardian of public order. Through the 20th century the Penal Code of 1858 was generally interpreted as a “(literal) translation” of the French Code Penal of 1810 and as evidence for the “western influence” on Ottoman legislation. Recent research has started to question this interpretation, focussed more closely on the normative aspects of the Ottoman Penal Code and analysed the Penal Code of 1858 as an adaptation of French law within the context of the Ottoman legal concepts during the tanẓīmāt. In my article I analyse the text as a part of political communication, as a monologue by which the state adresses its subjects. Even if large parts of the Ottoman Penal Code are translations from the French, the rhetoric patterns and terminology have to be taken seriously. The amalgamation of traditional rhetorics and a new terminology turns out to be a successful strategy to legitimise new legal concepts, which include a new relation between ḳānūn and serīʿat. In my article I will argue that the state’s traditional role as the guardian of public order is the starting point for the introduction of these new legal concepts.
Jiang S - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
The Structure of Crime's Shaping Effect on Penal Code:A Historical Review of the Relationship between German Penal Code and the Structure of Crime
Journal of Nanjing Normal University, 2013Co-Authors: Jiang SAbstract:The relationship between the Penal Code and the structure of crime is the prerequisite for the discussion on the structure of crime. In response to this issue,the scholars who argue for the retention of the former Soviet's theory of the structure of crime have proposed that Penal Code determine the structure of crime. Through a historical analysis of the relationship between German Penal Codes and their theories of the structure of crime,we can see that the definition of crime,wrongdoing and culpability are not the product of Penal Codes. On the contrary,they are the theoretical product of German criminal law scholars. More importantly,the theory of the basic structure of crime has shaped the improvement of German Penal Codes. The construction of Chinese theory of the structure of crime should not be restricted to China's Penal Code. Therefore,there is no barrier to the introduction of German theory of the structure of crime.
Paul H Robinson - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
The American Model Penal Code: A Brief Overview
New Criminal Law Review, 2007Co-Authors: Paul H Robinson, Markus D DubberAbstract:If there can be said to be an "American criminal Code," the Model Penal Code is it. Nonetheless, there remains an enormous diversity among the fifty-two American Penal Codes, including some that have never adopted a modern Code format or structure. Yet, even within the minority of states without a modern Code, the Model Penal Code has great influence, as courts regularly rely upon it to fashion the law that the state's criminal Code fails to provide. In this essay we provide a brief introduction to this historic document, its history and its content.
-
can a model Penal Code second save the states from themselves
Ohio State Journal of Criminal Law, 2004Co-Authors: Paul H Robinson, Michael T CahillAbstract:This commentary summarizes some of the institutional obstacles to serious reform the authors encountered in their work on two recent criminal-Code redrafting efforts, in Illinois and Kentucky. The authors call for a project to create a Model Penal Code Second, in the hope that such a centralized, high-profile, and less directly politically charged or biased effort would be an effective spur to major reform at the state level.
-
final report of the kentucky Penal Code revision project
2003Co-Authors: Paul H RobinsonAbstract:The Kentucky Criminal Justice Council, a constitutional body in Kentucky, undertook this project to examine the problems with Kentucky criminal law and to rewrite the Kentucky criminal Code. This two-volume Final Report of the Kentucky Penal Code Revision Project proposes a new criminal Code, in volume 1, together with an official commentary, in volume 2, that explains each provision and how and why it differs from existing law.The introduction to the Report summarizes the reasons for and the importance of criminal Code reform, and describes the techniques used in this rewrite project, including both the project’s drafting principles and the methods by which the Council organized its work on the project.
-
reforming the federal criminal Code and the model Penal Code a top ten list
2003Co-Authors: Paul H RobinsonAbstract:This article suggests ten changes that ought to be included in a reform of federal criminal law. Five of those are what would be considered basic characteristics of any modern criminal Code, and are in large part the earmarks of the Model Penal Code and its progeny: a comprehensive general part, an analytic structure, fully defined offenses using defined terms, a system for the interpretation of Code provisions, and a system of offenses that avoids overlaps and gaps. While the Model Penal Code made many advances, the 35 years since its promulgation have revealed shortcomings, and suggest a number of other reforms that a new federal criminal Code might profitably adopt. Least controversial is fixing the revealed drafting errors of the Model Penal Code. The article gives two examples of such errors, one technical, one conceptual: failure to define the distinction among conduct, circumstance, and result elements, and confusion in the definition of causation requirements. Other proposed reforms move beyond the perspective of the Model Penal Code drafters, and take account of the last decade's movement toward greater guidance of judges' sentencing discretion. Consistent with that trend, a new Code should use more grading categories, in order to have the liability determination under the criminal Code more narrowly constraint the range of possible sentences at the sentencing stage. Also consistent with the recent trend, in its ideal if not its practice, is the proposal that Code drafters follow an articulated distributive principle to develop statutory formulations and to define the rules by which the Code provisions are to be interpreted. Still more distant from the approach of the Model Penal Code are the final two proposals. First, it is suggested that a new Code be drafted in a way that avoids conflicts with the community's perceptions of desert, for this is necessary to enhance the Code's moral credibility with the community it governs, which in turn is necessary to increase the Code's power to gain compliance by that community. Finally, in a proposal that would make criminal Codes look very different than they currently do, the article suggests that a new criminal Code be drafted as two Codes: one addressed to the general public defining for them ex ante the rules of lawful conduct, the other written for criminal justice adjudicators -- judges, lawyers, police officials, and juries -- that sets principles for ex post adjudication of a violation of the rules of conduct. It is only through this separation, it is argued, that Codes can effectively perform both of the two central functions of a criminal Code: communicating to the public ex ante the rules of lawful conduct, and defining for adjudicators the principles governing ex post adjudication of a violation.