http://burneylawfirm.com/blog/2009/04/29/gun-goes-off-by-accident-none-hurt-you-get-10-years/ Irreverent and insightful observations on criminal law Wed, 08 Feb 2012 12:01:54 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.2.1 http://burneylawfirm.com/blog/2009/04/29/gun-goes-off-by-accident-none-hurt-you-get-10-years/comment-page-1/#comment-1871 » The Criminal Lawyer» Blog Archive » Gun Goes Off By Accident, None … » Criminal Defense Lawyer Search Tue, 29 Sep 2009 13:12:10 +0000 http://burneylawfirm.com/blog/2009/04/29/gun-goes-off-by-accident-none-hurt-you-get-10-years/#comment-1871 [...] info by Administrator « Legal Cat-asthrophe: First question a criminal lawyer should ask PROSECUTORIAL [...] [...] info by Administrator « Legal Cat-asthrophe: First question a criminal lawyer should ask PROSECUTORIAL [...]

]]> http://burneylawfirm.com/blog/2009/04/29/gun-goes-off-by-accident-none-hurt-you-get-10-years/comment-page-1/#comment-511 The Criminal Lawyer» Blog Archive » Grammar Schooled: Over-Zealous Feds Get an “F” in Adverbs Mon, 04 May 2009 20:20:30 +0000 http://burneylawfirm.com/blog/2009/04/29/gun-goes-off-by-accident-none-hurt-you-get-10-years/#comment-511 [...] where Congress has not addressed the mental element of a crime,” he said (a tip of the hat to one of Breyer’s own dissents last week). But “it is something else to expand a mens rea requirement that the statutory text [...] [...] where Congress has not addressed the mental element of a crime,” he said (a tip of the hat to one of Breyer’s own dissents last week). But “it is something else to expand a mens rea requirement that the statutory text [...]

]]> http://burneylawfirm.com/blog/2009/04/29/gun-goes-off-by-accident-none-hurt-you-get-10-years/comment-page-1/#comment-500 The Criminal Lawyer» Blog Archive » Upcoming New Hate-Crime Law — Nothing Wrong With the Idea, But This One Has Problems Sat, 02 May 2009 22:15:55 +0000 http://burneylawfirm.com/blog/2009/04/29/gun-goes-off-by-accident-none-hurt-you-get-10-years/#comment-500 [...] There are other mens rea out there, which sort of come at this continuum from right angles. ATTEMPT is the big one. It’s a form of intent, of purpose, but it slips in between each of the standard categories. You were trying to commit a crime, but for whatever reason it failed. If you tried to shoot a gun randomly out the window, but it jammed, you’re guilty of an attempted crime of recklessness — you intended to commit a crime with a reckless state of mind. If you tried to purposely shoot someone, but the gun jammed, you’re guilty of attempted murder, attempting to commit a crime with an intentional state of mind. Attempts aren’t punished as severely, because the state of mind is not the only reason for enhanced punishment — the events themselves also play a part in determining culpability (a fact that some on the Supreme Court seem to have forgotten). [...] [...] There are other mens rea out there, which sort of come at this continuum from right angles. ATTEMPT is the big one. It’s a form of intent, of purpose, but it slips in between each of the standard categories. You were trying to commit a crime, but for whatever reason it failed. If you tried to shoot a gun randomly out the window, but it jammed, you’re guilty of an attempted crime of recklessness — you intended to commit a crime with a reckless state of mind. If you tried to purposely shoot someone, but the gun jammed, you’re guilty of attempted murder, attempting to commit a crime with an intentional state of mind. Attempts aren’t punished as severely, because the state of mind is not the only reason for enhanced punishment — the events themselves also play a part in determining culpability (a fact that some on the Supreme Court seem to have forgotten). [...]

]]>