Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
Articles 1 - 2 of 2
Full-Text Articles in Law
On Strict Liability Crimes: Preserving A Moral Framework For Criminal Intent In An Intent-Free Moral World, W. Robert Thomas
On Strict Liability Crimes: Preserving A Moral Framework For Criminal Intent In An Intent-Free Moral World, W. Robert Thomas
Michigan Law Review
The law has long recognized a presumption against criminal strict liability. This Note situates that presumption in terms of moral intuitions about the role of intention and the unique nature of criminal punishment. Two sources-recent laws from state legislatures and recent advances in moral philosophy-pose distinct challenges to the presumption against strict liability crimes. This Note offers a solution to the philosophical problem that informs how courts could address the legislative problem. First, it argues that the purported problem from philosophy stems from a mistaken relationship drawn between criminal law and morality. Second, it outlines a slightly more nuanced moral …
Criminal Law And Procedure -- Privilege Against Self-Incrimination -- Duty To Give Requested Instruction That No Significance Should Be Attached To Defendant's Failure To Testify, Michigan Law Review
Criminal Law And Procedure -- Privilege Against Self-Incrimination -- Duty To Give Requested Instruction That No Significance Should Be Attached To Defendant's Failure To Testify, Michigan Law Review
Michigan Law Review
Defendant, charged with conspiracy to import and sell narcotics, requested a special instruction that failure of defendant to take the witness stand does not create any presumption against him. A federal statute specifically provides that no such presumption shall arise. The trial court refused the instruction, and after the circuit court of appeals affirmed the conviction, the case was taken to the United States Supreme Court. Held, the statute gave defendant a right upon request to have such an instruction given. The error committed by its refusal was not a mere "technical error," but one affecting defendant's substantial rights. …