Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
Articles 1 - 3 of 3
Full-Text Articles in Jurisprudence
A Brief Summary And Critique Of Criminal Liability Rules For Intoxicated Conduct, Paul H. Robinson
A Brief Summary And Critique Of Criminal Liability Rules For Intoxicated Conduct, Paul H. Robinson
All Faculty Scholarship
This essay provides an overview of the legal issues relating to intoxication, including the effect of voluntary intoxication in imputing to an offender a required offense culpable state of mind that he may not actually have had at the time of the offense; the effect of involuntary intoxication in providing a defense by negating a required offense culpability element or by satisfying the conditions of a general excuse; the legal effect of alcoholism or addiction in rendering intoxication involuntary; and the limitation on using alcoholism or addiction in this way if the offender can be judged to be reasonably responsible …
A Functional Analysis Of Criminal Law, Paul H. Robinson
A Functional Analysis Of Criminal Law, Paul H. Robinson
All Faculty Scholarship
The criminal law has three primary functions. First, it must define and announce the conduct that is prohibited (or required) by the criminal law. Such rules of conduct, as they have been called, provide ex ante direction to members of the community as to the conduct that must be avoided (or that must be performed) upon pain of criminal sanction. This may be termed the rule articulation function of the doctrine. When a violation of the rules of conduct occurs, the criminal law takes on a different role. It must decide whether the violation merits criminal liability. This second function, …
The Role Of Harm And Evil In Criminal Law: A Study In Legislative Deception?, Paul H. Robinson
The Role Of Harm And Evil In Criminal Law: A Study In Legislative Deception?, Paul H. Robinson
All Faculty Scholarship
What is the role of the occurrence of harm or evil in criminal law? What should it be? Answers to these questions commonly use the distinction between what is called an objective and a subjective view of criminality. To oversimplify, the objective view maintains that the occurrence of the harm or evil defined by the offense is highly relevant. The subjectivist view maintains that such harm or evil is irrelevant; only the actor's culpable state of mind regarding the occurrence of the harm or evil is important. The labels tend to overstate a rather subtle distinction. The objectivist or harmful …