Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Keyword
-
- Adult prosecution of juveniles (1)
- Blameworthiness principle (1)
- Child development (1)
- Coercive crime-control (1)
- Consequentialism (1)
-
- Core principles (1)
- Criminal codes (1)
- Culpability (1)
- Democratic values (1)
- Desert (1)
- Duress (1)
- Empirical & cross-cultural studies (1)
- Empirical desert (1)
- Excuse defenses (1)
- Extreme emotional disturbance (1)
- Felony murder (1)
- Heat of passion (1)
- Individualization (1)
- Insanity (1)
- Interest group pressure (1)
- International criminal law (1)
- Involuntary intoxication (1)
- Knowledge (1)
- Legality principle (1)
- Legislative delegation (1)
- Legislative mistake (1)
- Mistake of law (1)
- Mistaken justification (1)
- Mitigation (1)
- Mitigations (1)
Articles 1 - 3 of 3
Full-Text Articles in Philosophy
Undemocratic Crimes, Paul H. Robinson, Jonathan C. Wilt
Undemocratic Crimes, Paul H. Robinson, Jonathan C. Wilt
All Faculty Scholarship
One might assume that in a working democracy the criminal law rules would reflect the community’s shared judgments regarding justice and punishment. This is especially true because social science research shows that lay people generally think about criminal liability and punishment in consistent ways: in terms of desert, doing justice and avoiding injustice. Moreover, there are compelling arguments for demanding consistency between community views and criminal law rules based upon the importance of democratic values, effective crime-control, and the deontological value of justice itself.
It may then come as a surprise, and a disappointment, that a wide range of common …
Criminal Law’S Core Principles, Paul H. Robinson
Criminal Law’S Core Principles, Paul H. Robinson
All Faculty Scholarship
Modern criminal law scholars and policymakers assume they are free to construct criminal law rules by focusing exclusively on the criminal justice theory of the day. But this “blank slate” conception of criminal lawmaking is dangerously misguided. In fact, lawmakers are writing on a slate on which core principles are already indelibly written and realistically they are free only to add detail in the implementation of those principles and to add additional provisions not inconsistent with them. Attempts to do otherwise are destined to produce tragic results from both utilitarian and retributivist views.
Many writers dispute that such core principles …
Individualizing Criminal Law’S Justice Judgments: Shortcomings In The Doctrines Of Culpability, Mitigation, And Excuse, Paul H. Robinson, Lindsay Holcomb
Individualizing Criminal Law’S Justice Judgments: Shortcomings In The Doctrines Of Culpability, Mitigation, And Excuse, Paul H. Robinson, Lindsay Holcomb
All Faculty Scholarship
In judging an offender’s culpability, mitigation, or excuse, there seems to be general agreement that it is appropriate for the criminal law to take into account such things as the offender’s youthfulness or her significantly low IQ. There is even support for taking account of their distorted perceptions and reasoning induced by traumatic experiences, as in battered spouse syndrome. On the other hand, there seems to be equally strong opposition to taking account of things such as racism or homophobia that played a role in bringing about the offense. In between these two clear points, however, exists a large collection …