Last edited by Ararisar
Wednesday, August 12, 2020 | History

3 edition of Justification and excuse in the criminal law found in the catalog.

Justification and excuse in the criminal law

Justification and excuse in the criminal law

a collection of essays

  • 68 Want to read
  • 1 Currently reading

Published by Garland Pub. in New York .
Written in English

    Places:
  • Philosophy.
    • Subjects:
    • Justification (Law),
    • Criminal liability.,
    • Criminal law -- Philosophy.

    • Edition Notes

      Includes bibliographical references and index.

      Statementedited by Michael Louis Corrado.
      SeriesGarland studies in applied ethics ;, v. 1, Garland reference library of social science ;, v. 831
      ContributionsCorrado, Michael Louis, 1940-
      Classifications
      LC ClassificationsK5086 .J87 1994
      The Physical Object
      Paginationxxxvii, 625 p. ;
      Number of Pages625
      ID Numbers
      Open LibraryOL1406719M
      ISBN 100815308256
      LC Control Number93015044

      Typically, justification and excuse defenses admit that the defendant committed the criminal act with the requisite intent, but insist that the conduct should not be criminal. A defense based on justification focuses on the offense. A justification defense claims that the defendant’s conduct should be legal rather than criminal because it. A defense based on justification focuses on the offense. A justification defense claims that the defendant’s conduct should be legal rather than criminal because it supports a principle valued by society. A defense based on excuse focuses on the defendant. An excuse defense claims that even though the defendant committed the criminal act with.

      Justification, Excuse, Failure of Proof, Offense Modification, and Nonexculpatory defense Justification Defenses A group of defenses in which the defendant claims that his actions were right or justified based on the circumstances. evidence that is not relevant for justification or excuse may still be relied on during the sentencing stage as a(n) _____ that may reduce the defendant's punishment. criminal law chapter 8. 40 terms. nigist_teklu. Criminal Law Chapter 8 Justifications. 17 terms. Jana_Frazier. CRJS Ch. terms. kianarphillips.

      Comment on Justification and Excuse Jerome Hall Part of theCourts Commons,Criminal Law Commons, and theCriminal Procedure Commons This Response or Comment is brought to you for free and open access by the Faculty Scholarship at Digital Repository @ Maurer Law. It has beenCited by: 9. lenges criminal and tort law scholars to advance a conception of the justification/excuse distinction that both explains the historic codifi- cation of this distinction and assists in the systematization of case-by-Cited by:


Share this book
You might also like
Policy

Policy

Real estate and urban land analysis

Real estate and urban land analysis

Family Enc of Art

Family Enc of Art

True north

True north

calculus affair

calculus affair

impact of police collective bargaining upon municipal police management in Ontario, 1973-1984: a socio-legal analysis.

impact of police collective bargaining upon municipal police management in Ontario, 1973-1984: a socio-legal analysis.

Accounting, an introduction.

Accounting, an introduction.

painting of buildings

painting of buildings

Should a political labor party be formed?

Should a political labor party be formed?

The control of the sea-bed

The control of the sea-bed

HIV/AIDS education and training project, 1990-1994

HIV/AIDS education and training project, 1990-1994

Justification and excuse in the criminal law Download PDF EPUB FB2

Justification and Excuse in the Criminal Law: A Collection of Essays (Garland Reference Library of Social Science) Hardcover – January 1, by Michael Louis Corrado (Editor)Format: Hardcover.

Justification and excuse in the criminal law (The Hamlyn lectures) Hardcover – January 1, byAuthor: J. C Smith. In the the criminal law system of the United States, excuse and justification are most commonly employed in affirmative defenses that provide rationale for finding the defendant not guilty, even though he committed an actus reus, possessed the necessary state of mind, and caused the damage to society that would normally constitute a criminal offense.

Particular circumstances determine whether Clyde is guilty of murder, guilty of manslaughter, not guilty because he has a good excuse, or not guilty because he has a good justification. -/- The second part addresses the complicated relationship between criminal responsibility and moral responsibility.

The author considers justification and excuse in criminal law, both as a topic of extensive academic debate and also in the context of the problems faced by the ordinary citizen who may be confronted with a choice between breaking Justification and excuse in the criminal law book letter of the law, or seeing others suffer harm.

Justification and excuse in the criminal law: a collection of essays /​ edited by Michael Louis Corrado. A justification defense justifies the alleged criminal behavior as actually being socially acceptable or even heroic. Some common examples of justification defenses include: Self-Defense: This justification defense is probably already familiar to you.

Under this legal principle, criminal acts like battery or even homicide are not subject to. Book description. The defences available to an agent accused of wrongdoing can be considered as justifications (which render acts lawful) or excuses (which shield the agent from the legal consequences Cited by: 2.

Drawing on the well-known distinction between conduct rules and decision rules, it argues further that the distinction between justification and excuse in the criminal law is only this: A Author: Mitchell N.

Berman. Issues discussed in this text include: the distinction between justification and excuse, and the consequences that may result from it; the "Stephen Waldorf" case in the context of potential resistance to mistakenly applied but lawful force; whether circumstances unknown to Author: J.

Smith. View More View Less. 1 1Dr. George Mousourakis is an Assistant Professor in Law, he lectures in legal philosopy and criminal law at the University of Queensland, by: 3. Drawing on the well-known distinction between conduct rules and decision rules, it argues that the distinction between justification and excuse, for purposes of a criminal law taxonomy, is only this: A justified action is not criminal, whereas an excused defendant has committed a criminal Cited by: Mark Dsouza’s new book, Rationale-Based Defences in Criminal Law, aims to shed new light on the question of how to conceptualize justifications and excuses as defenses against criminal liability.

His offers an alternative to the common account on which justifications negate the wrongness of acts whereas excuses negate only the actor’s. Justification and Excuse in the Criminal Law by J. Smith, Chi: QC LLD.F A B Honorary Bencher of Lincoln's Inn; Honorary Fellow of Downing College, Cambridge; Emeritus Professor of Law, University of Nottingham.

In this book based on the 40th series of Hamlyn Lec-tures, Professor Smith examines a. A defense of justification is the product of society's determination that the actual existence of certain circumstances will operate to make proper and legal what otherwise would be criminal conduct.

A defense of excuse, contrarily, does not make legal and proper conduct which ordinarily would result in criminal liability; instead, it openly recognizes the criminality of the conduct but excuses it because the.

ISBN: OCLC Number: Description: xxxvii, pages ; 23 cm. Contents: A plea for excuses / J.L. Austin--Legal responsibility and excuses / H.L.A. Hart--The individualization of excusing conditions / George P. Fletcher--A motivational theory of excuses in the criminal law / Richard Brandt--An economic theory of the criminal law / Richard A.

Posner--Mistakes. Legal defences’ falls into two categories, excuse defences and justification defences. Excuse defence is when the defendant admits to committing a criminal act but believes that he or she cannot be held responsible because there was no criminal intent.

Excuse defences that are used in courts today are; Age, Mental Disorder, Automatism, Mistake of Fact and Mistake of Law. The author considers justification and excuse in criminal law, both as a topic of extensive academic debate and also in the context of the problems faced by the.

This chapter notes that justifications appear to entail accepting responsibility but denying the conduct was wrongful or impermissible, whereas excuses admit the conduct was wrongful but deny the defendant was responsible.

The distinction enables one to categorize different sorts of defenses, which arguably could have different legal by: 1. substantive criminal law. A critique of the relevant aspects of Indian Evidence law is accordingly undertaken in this section.

Justification and Excuse Distinguished A. Relationship to the Legal Norm The distinct notions of justification and excuse, as different types of exculpatory claims in the criminal law, are best understood by. @MISC{Law_excusein, author = {Criminal Law and J. C. Smith Justification and J.

C. Smith}, title = {Excuse in the Criminal Law}, year = {}} Share. OpenURL. Abstract. In this book based on the 40th series of Hamlyn Lectures, Professor Smith examines a subject of great importance to the criminal law, both as a current topic of extensive academic.Justifications deny that the defendant’s commission of the offense was wrongful or illegal.

They include law enforcement, defensive force, and necessity. Excuses deny that the defendant’s wrongful commission of the offense merits : Guyora Binder.justification and excuse serve quite different functions in the criminal law, as indeed they do in morality as well.

Something is lost when the difficulty of distinguishing between the two is made more mysterious than it needs to by: