Modern Role of Criminal Statutes
1. Principle of Legality
a. A person cannot be convicted and punished unless their conduct was defined as criminal before they acted. Prohibition on retroactive criminal lawmaking.
b. Commonwealth v. Mochan, Pennsylvania Superior Court 1955
i. The common law is sufficiently broad to punish as a misdemeanor “any act which directly injures or tends to injure the public” or which “openly outrages decency and is injurious to public morals.”
c. Keeler v. Superior Court, SC of California 1970
i. The first essential of due process is fair warning of the act which is made punishable as a crime.
1. SCOTUS: “That the terms of a penal statute creating a new offense must be sufficiently explicit to inform those who are subject to it what conduct on their part will render them liable to its penalties.”
ii. Due process prohibits the judicial alteration of criminal law where it is unforeseeable or unexpected by reference to the law that existed before the defendant’s conduct.
1. If the new judicial interpretation was foreseeable, it can be applied retroactively.
2. Statutory Clarity
a. In re Banks, SC of North Carolina, 1978
i. Vagueness
1. “A criminal statute must be sufficiently definite to give notice of the required conduct.”
2. If statute is clear and unambiguous, there is no room for judicial construction, and courts must give the statute its plain and definite meaning.
3. If statute is ambiguous or unclear in its meaning, courts must resort to judicial construction to ascertain legislative intent.
a. Words, Context, Legislative history.
b. Prior state judicial construction of the statute.
ii. Overbreadth
1. SCOTUS: state regulation may not be achieved by means which sweep unnecessarily broadly and thereby invade the area of protected freedoms.
b. SCOTUS on Vagueness
i. The Due Process Clause forbids the enforcement of any statute that, due to vagueness in language, “vests virtually complete discretion in the hands of the police to determine whether the suspect has satisfied [its requirements].”
ii. City of Chicago v. Morales, SCOTUS 1999
1. A criminal statute:
a. Must provide notice
b. Must establish minimal guidelines to govern law enforcement
3. Rule of Lenity
a. If a statute can reasonably be interpreted favorably to the government and just as reasonably be interpreted favorably to the defendant’s interests, it should be read in the light more favorable to the defendant.
b. Not constitutionally compelled, rule of statutory interpretation only where a statute is ambiguous
1. Principle of Legality
a. A person cannot be convicted and punished unless their conduct was defined as criminal before they acted. Prohibition on retroactive criminal lawmaking.
b. Commonwealth v. Mochan, Pennsylvania Superior Court 1955
i. The common law is sufficiently broad to punish as a misdemeanor “any act which directly injures or tends to injure the public” or which “openly outrages decency and is injurious to public morals.”
c. Keeler v. Superior Court, SC of California 1970
i. The first essential of due process is fair warning of the act which is made punishable as a crime.
1. SCOTUS: “That the terms of a penal statute creating a new offense must be sufficiently explicit to inform those who are subject to it what conduct on their part will render them liable to its penalties.”
ii. Due process prohibits the judicial alteration of criminal law where it is unforeseeable or unexpected by reference to the law that existed before the defendant’s conduct.
1. If the new judicial interpretation was foreseeable, it can be applied retroactively.
2. Statutory Clarity
a. In re Banks, SC of North Carolina, 1978
i. Vagueness
1. “A criminal statute must be sufficiently definite to give notice of the required conduct.”
2. If statute is clear and unambiguous, there is no room for judicial construction, and courts must give the statute its plain and definite meaning.
3. If statute is ambiguous or unclear in its meaning, courts must resort to judicial construction to ascertain legislative intent.
a. Words, Context, Legislative history.
b. Prior state judicial construction of the statute.
ii. Overbreadth
1. SCOTUS: state regulation may not be achieved by means which sweep unnecessarily broadly and thereby invade the area of protected freedoms.
b. SCOTUS on Vagueness
i. The Due Process Clause forbids the enforcement of any statute that, due to vagueness in language, “vests virtually complete discretion in the hands of the police to determine whether the suspect has satisfied [its requirements].”
ii. City of Chicago v. Morales, SCOTUS 1999
1. A criminal statute:
a. Must provide notice
b. Must establish minimal guidelines to govern law enforcement
3. Rule of Lenity
a. If a statute can reasonably be interpreted favorably to the government and just as reasonably be interpreted favorably to the defendant’s interests, it should be read in the light more favorable to the defendant.
b. Not constitutionally compelled, rule of statutory interpretation only where a statute is ambiguous
0 commentaires:
Enregistrer un commentaire