Defining Crimes, by the distinguished author team of Joseph L. Hoffmann (Indiana) and William J. Stuntz (late of Harvard), breaks from the tradition of Model Penal Code-centric casebooks and focuses instead on the rich intellectual and theoretical issues that arise from how crimes actually get defined and applied today by state and federal legislatures, trial and appellate courts, police, prosecutors, defense lawyers, and juries. The innovative approach of Defining Crimes enables the in-depth study of the problems and issues that affect the day-to-day contemporary practice of criminal law. New to the Fourth Edition: Three online chapters: Gun Crimes (formerly Chapter 8), Hate Crimes, and Crimmigration New section about the crime of receiving stolen property in Chapter 5 (Property Crimes) Principal case—U.S. v. Alvarez—about conspiracy in Chapter 7 (Inchoate Crimes and Accomplice Liability) New section about consent in Chapter 10 (Defenses), discussing the consent defense to crimes other than rape and sexual assault Notes discussing several prominent recent cases, including those involving Tamir Rice (2014), Brock Turner (2015), Amber Guyger (2018), Michael Drejka (2018), Michelle Carter (Mass. S.Ct. 2019), and George Floyd (2020)Extended excerpt from Kahler v. Kansas in Chapter 10 (Defenses), in which the Supreme Court upheld Kansas’s limited version of the insanity defense against a due process challenge, and notes about the Court’s recent decisions in Rehaif v. United States and Kelly v. United States Notes discussing recent constitutional challenges to the use of criminal law against persons experiencing homelessness Professors and students will benefit from: Strong emphasis on the traditional approach to mens rea still used in the large majority of American jurisdictions—including “general intent,” “specific intent,” malice, mistake doctrine, and strict liability. The Model Penal Code is also covered, for sake of comparison and because its alternative mens rea approach is used in some jurisdictions. A focus on the most commonly prosecuted crimes, including Property Crimes, Drug Crimes, and Crimes of Sex and Sexual Violence. Sub-chapter on Rape is carefully designed to prompt thoughtful class discussion about acquaintance rape, intoxication, “no means no,” and “yes means yes” laws and policies. Focus on the complex interactions between key institutional players—legislatures, courts, police, prosecutors, defense lawyers, and juries—that share responsibility for defining and applying crimes. Text written by experienced and distinguished authors. Introductory sections to explain the fundamentals of criminal law that students need to know in order to understand many of the chapters and sub-chapters. Secondary materials that provide in-depth social, historical, and/or political context for many of the issues that are covered in the book. A Contemporary approach, with most main cases decided since 2000, and notes that discuss cases drawn from today’s headlines.

Defining Crime explores the limitations of the legal definition of crime, how that politically based definition has shaped criminological research, and why criminologists must redefine crime to include scientific objectivity.

This collection of original essays, by some of the best known contemporary criminal law theorists, tackles a range of issues about the criminal law's 'special part' - the part of the criminal law that defines specific offences. One of its aims is to show the importance, for theory as well as for practice, of focusing on the special part as well as on the general part which usually receives much more theoretical attention. Some of the issues covered concern the proper scope of the criminal law, for example how far should it include offences of possession, or endangerment? If it should punish only wrongful conduct, how can it justly include so-called 'mala prohibita', which are often said to involve conduct that is not wrongful prior to its legal prohibition? Other issues concern the ways in which crimes should be classified. Can we make plausible sense, for instance, of the orthodox distinction between crimes of basic and general intent? Should domestic violence be definedas a distinct offence, distinguished from other kinds of personal violence? Also examined are the ways in which specific offences should be defined, to what extent those definitions should identify distinctive types of wrongs, and the light that such definitional questions throw on the grounds and structures of criminal liability. Such issues are discussed in relation not only to such crimes as murder, rape, theft and other property offences, but also in relation to offences such as bribery, endangerment and possession that have not traditionally been subjects for in depth theoretical analysis.

A law professor and former prosecutor reveals how inconsistent ideas about violence, enshrined in law, are at the root of the problems that plague our entire criminal justice system—from mass incarceration to police brutality. We take for granted that some crimes are violent and others aren’t. But how do we decide what counts as a violent act? David Alan Sklansky argues that legal notions about violence—its definition, causes, and moral significance—are functions of political choices, not eternal truths. And these choices are central to failures of our criminal justice system. The common distinction between violent and nonviolent acts, for example, played virtually no role in criminal law before the latter half of the twentieth century. Yet to this day, with more crimes than ever called “violent,” this distinction determines how we judge the seriousness of an offense, as well as the perpetrator’s debt and danger to society. Similarly, criminal law today treats violence as a pathology of individual character. But in other areas of law, including the procedural law that covers police conduct, the situational context of violence carries more weight. The result of these inconsistencies, and of society’s unique fear of violence since the 1960s, has been an application of law that reinforces inequities of race and class, undermining law’s legitimacy. A Pattern of Violence shows that novel legal philosophies of violence have motivated mass incarceration, blunted efforts to hold police accountable, constrained responses to sexual assault and domestic abuse, pushed juvenile offenders into adult prisons, encouraged toleration of prison violence, and limited responses to mass shootings. Reforming legal notions of violence is therefore an essential step toward justice.

Defining Federal Crimes, Second Edition (available for free to students in e-book format) frames federal criminal law as a distinctive world created and shaped by the interplay between the three branches of the federal government. It provides an overview of basic doctrine while inviting students to explore the many difficult and unsettled questions that continue to perplex judges, prosecutors, defense attorneys, and policymakers. Particularly since students' basic Criminal Law courses draw on penal laws from any number of jurisdictions, this book will be their first exposure to an actual criminal law system, in which each law-shaping institution can react to the moves of the others. New to the Second Edition: Reorganization of the domestic Commerce Clause section and exploration of the Supreme Court's aborted engagement with the Treaty Power in Bond v. U.S. (Ch.2) Inclusion of the Court's deployment of the "rule of lenity" in Yates v. U.S. and reorganization of the mens rea section, including Elonis v. U.S. (Ch.3) Revisions to highlight the growing tension between the cases precluding mail fraud liability for deceit that "merely" causes the victim to enter into a transaction and those permitting liability an intangible property "right to control" theory (Ch.4) Considerable revision to the "under color of official right" extortion sections to accommodate McDonnell v. U.S.; a new case (Ocasio v. U.S.) exploring the interaction between "under color of official right" complicity and victim status in "fear of economic loss" extortion; a new case (U.S. v. Baroni--the "Bridgegate Case") offering an interesting use of the "misapplication" prong of section 18 U.S.C. 666 (Ch.6) New cases emerging from the Matthew Shepard and James Byrd, Jr., Hate Crimes Prevention Act of 2009, including U.S. v. Miller (Ch.7) New case (Rosemond v. U.S.) in Aiding and Abetting discussion; a new section on Accessory after the Fact and Misprison of Felony liability, including U.S. v. Olson; substantial revision of Material Support of Terrorism section (Ch.8) Substantial updates to Ch.9, including coverage of the opioid crisis and enforcement responses to it; exploration of the Court's analysis of McFadden v. U.S.; discussion of Congress's use of its appropriations power to limit the federal prosecution of medicinal marijuana cases, including U.S. v. Kleinman; a new case (U.S. v. Campbell) about the Maritime Drug Law Enforcement Act; a new section on prior felony informations and their use for plea bargaining leverage, including U.S. v. Kupa; new discussion of the charging policies of the Attorneys General and of disparate judicial analyses of narcotics mandatory minimums Extended discussions of corporate liability to include recent judicial efforts to oversee deferred prosecution agreements (Ch.11) Reorganization of Ch.12, with more attention given to the clash between Chevron deference and the rule of lenity Professors and students will benefit from: Comprehensive overview of the many federal criminal offenses prosecutors use to charge political corruption and explores difficult questions associated with criminalizing aspects of the political process Framing of apparently diverse offenses like money laundering, RICO, and material support of terrorism as the complicity-broadening devices that make them intellectually interesting and practically potent Use of "Notes and Questions" to situate major cases in their proper political and historical contexts, tie together topics from different parts of the book that touch on similar themes, and explore lingering doctrinal ambiguities

This book provides an analysis of the two concepts of power and crime and posits that criminologists can learn more about these concepts by incorporating ideas from disciplines outside of criminology. Although arguably a 'rendezvous' discipline, Vincenzo Ruggiero argues that criminology can gain much insight from other fields such as the political sciences, ethics, social theory, critical legal studies, economic theory, and classical literature. In this book Ruggiero offers an authoritative synthesis of a range of intellectual conceptions of crime and power, drawing on the works and theories of classical, as well as contemporary thinkers, in the above fields of knowledge, arguing that criminology can ‘humbly’ renounce claims to intellectual independence and adopt notions and perspectives from other disciplines. The theories presented locate the crimes of the powerful in different disciplinary contexts and make the book essential reading for academics and students involved in the study of criminology, sociology, law, politics and philosophy.

The purpose of this book is to provide a concise reference specifying the elements of crimes defined in the Wisconsin Statutes and indicating the applicable penalty. - p. ix.

This scholarly legal work focuses on the dilemma of prosecuting gender-based crimes under the statutes of the international criminal tribunals with reference to the principle of fair labelling. In this book Hilmi M. Zawati explains how the abstractness and lack of accurate description of gender-based crimes in the statutory laws of the international criminal tribunals and courts infringe the principle of fair labelling, lead to inconsistent verdicts and punishments, and cause inadequate prosecution of these crimes. This inquiry deals with gender-based crimes as a case study, and with fair labelling as a legal principle and a theoretical framework. Critical and timely, this study contributes to existing scholarship in many different ways. It is the first legal analysis to focus on the dilemma of prosecuting and punishing wartime gender-based crimes in the statutory laws of the international criminal tribunals and the ICC in the context of fair labelling. Moreover, it emphasizes that applying fair labelling to wartime gender-based crimes would enable the tribunals and the ICC to deliver fair judgments, eliminate inconsistent prosecution, overcome shortcomings in addressing gender-based crimes within their jurisprudence, while breaking the cycle of impunity for these crimes. Consisting of two parts, this work begins by outlining the central focus and theoretical legal framework of the study. It concentrates on fair labelling as an imperative legal principle and a legal framework, examines its intellectual development, scope and justification, and illustrates its applicability to gender-based crimes. The second part addresses the dilemma of prosecuting gender-based crimes in the international criminal tribunals.

Judge Mettraux's four-volume compendium, International Crimes: Law and Practice, will provide the most detailed and authoritative account to-date of the law of international crimes. It is a scholarly tour de force providing a unique blend of academic rigour and an insight into the practice of international criminal law. The compendium is un-rivalled in its breadth and depth, covering almost a century of legal practice, dozens of jurisdictions (national and international), thousands of decisions and judgments and hundreds of cases. This second volume discusses in detail crimes against humanity.