Law Commons^™

Whose Crime Is It Anyway?: Liability For The Lethal Acts Of Nonparticipants In The Felony, Michelle S. Simon

Elisabeth Haub School of Law Faculty Publications

This Article explores the methodology that courts should employ when determining the liability of a defendant under the felony-murder doctrine, where the perpetration of a felony results in the death of a nonparticipant in the crime by another nonparticipant. Part I of the Article addresses the history of the doctrine, the policies that have sustained it throughout history, and the modern statutory promulgations of the rule. Part II explores not only how courts have handled the doctrine's causation requirement, but also how legislatures have responded to this requirement. Further, Part II discusses the court-created theories of agency and proximate cause. …

Obstacles To The Creation Of A Permanent War Crimes Tribunal, Christopher L. Blakesley

Scholarly Works

Individual liability for war crimes is difficult to enforce and is unlikely to be accepted uniformly by states.

Individual criminal responsibility is the cornerstone of any international war crimes tribunal. Nuremberg Principle I provides that “[a]ny person who commits an act which constitutes a crime under international law is responsible therefor and liable to punishment.” Acts by heads of state or other government officials, even if committed in an official capacity, may not constitute an immunity defense to or mitigate criminality. These officials, therefore, could also be held responsible for offenses committed pursuant to their orders. Additionally, liability for criminal …

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 …