美国刑法典:一般辩护

IF 3 1区 社会学 Q1 LAW Journal of Legal Analysis Pub Date : 2015-03-15 DOI:10.1093/JLA/LAV001
P. Robinson, M. Kussmaul, Camber M. Stoddard, I. Rudyak, A. Kuersten
{"title":"美国刑法典:一般辩护","authors":"P. Robinson, M. Kussmaul, Camber M. Stoddard, I. Rudyak, A. Kuersten","doi":"10.1093/JLA/LAV001","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"There are fifty-two different bodies of criminal law at work in the United States, as diverse as they are many. Each one stakes out seemingly innumerable positions on a range of highly contested issues. So, how is one to know what the “American rule” is on any given matter of criminal law? This article takes the first step towards answering this question by presenting the first installment of the “American Criminal Code.”This article is the result of an exhaustive research project that examined every contested issue relating to the general defenses to criminal liability, including all justification, excuse, and non-exculpatory defenses. With this foundation, the article determines the majority American position among the fifty-two jurisdictions, and formulates statutory language for each defense that reflects the majority American rule in all respects. The article also compares and contrasts the majority position on each issue to all significant minority positions, the Model Penal Code, and the National Commission’s proposed code.Finally, using the results of these analyses, the article compares patterns among the states for issues within the most controversial justification defense, the Defense of Persons, to a wide range of other variables — such as state population, racial characteristics, violent crime rates, and gun ownership — and highlights many interesting correlations. While applying this kind of doctrinal correlation analysis to all of the project’s existing data would be a major undertaking many times larger than the present project, the article illustrates how such analysis can be done, and how interesting the revealed patterns can be.","PeriodicalId":45189,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Legal Analysis","volume":"28 1","pages":"37-150"},"PeriodicalIF":3.0000,"publicationDate":"2015-03-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"3","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The American Criminal Code: General Defenses\",\"authors\":\"P. Robinson, M. Kussmaul, Camber M. Stoddard, I. Rudyak, A. Kuersten\",\"doi\":\"10.1093/JLA/LAV001\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"There are fifty-two different bodies of criminal law at work in the United States, as diverse as they are many. Each one stakes out seemingly innumerable positions on a range of highly contested issues. So, how is one to know what the “American rule” is on any given matter of criminal law? This article takes the first step towards answering this question by presenting the first installment of the “American Criminal Code.”This article is the result of an exhaustive research project that examined every contested issue relating to the general defenses to criminal liability, including all justification, excuse, and non-exculpatory defenses. With this foundation, the article determines the majority American position among the fifty-two jurisdictions, and formulates statutory language for each defense that reflects the majority American rule in all respects. The article also compares and contrasts the majority position on each issue to all significant minority positions, the Model Penal Code, and the National Commission’s proposed code.Finally, using the results of these analyses, the article compares patterns among the states for issues within the most controversial justification defense, the Defense of Persons, to a wide range of other variables — such as state population, racial characteristics, violent crime rates, and gun ownership — and highlights many interesting correlations. While applying this kind of doctrinal correlation analysis to all of the project’s existing data would be a major undertaking many times larger than the present project, the article illustrates how such analysis can be done, and how interesting the revealed patterns can be.\",\"PeriodicalId\":45189,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Legal Analysis\",\"volume\":\"28 1\",\"pages\":\"37-150\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2015-03-15\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"3\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Legal Analysis\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"90\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1093/JLA/LAV001\",\"RegionNum\":1,\"RegionCategory\":\"社会学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"LAW\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Legal Analysis","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/JLA/LAV001","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"LAW","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 3

摘要

在美国,有52个不同的刑法机构在起作用,它们种类繁多。在一系列高度争议的问题上,两党似乎都表明了无数的立场。那么,一个人如何知道在任何特定的刑法问题上的“美国规则”是什么呢?本文通过介绍“美国刑法典”的第一部分,迈出了回答这个问题的第一步。本文是一项详尽的研究项目的结果,该项目审查了与刑事责任一般辩护有关的每一个有争议的问题,包括所有的正当理由、借口和非无罪辩护。在此基础上,本文确定了美国多数人在52个司法管辖区中的立场,并为每种辩护制定了反映美国多数人统治各方面的法定语言。本文还将多数人在每个问题上的立场与所有重要的少数人立场、《示范刑法典》和国家委员会的拟议法典进行了比较和对比。最后,利用这些分析的结果,本文比较了各州在最具争议的辩护辩护(人身辩护)问题上的模式,以及其他广泛的变量——如州人口、种族特征、暴力犯罪率和枪支所有权——并强调了许多有趣的相关性。虽然将这种理论相关分析应用于所有项目的现有数据将是一项比当前项目大许多倍的主要任务,但本文说明了如何进行这种分析,以及揭示的模式是多么有趣。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
The American Criminal Code: General Defenses
There are fifty-two different bodies of criminal law at work in the United States, as diverse as they are many. Each one stakes out seemingly innumerable positions on a range of highly contested issues. So, how is one to know what the “American rule” is on any given matter of criminal law? This article takes the first step towards answering this question by presenting the first installment of the “American Criminal Code.”This article is the result of an exhaustive research project that examined every contested issue relating to the general defenses to criminal liability, including all justification, excuse, and non-exculpatory defenses. With this foundation, the article determines the majority American position among the fifty-two jurisdictions, and formulates statutory language for each defense that reflects the majority American rule in all respects. The article also compares and contrasts the majority position on each issue to all significant minority positions, the Model Penal Code, and the National Commission’s proposed code.Finally, using the results of these analyses, the article compares patterns among the states for issues within the most controversial justification defense, the Defense of Persons, to a wide range of other variables — such as state population, racial characteristics, violent crime rates, and gun ownership — and highlights many interesting correlations. While applying this kind of doctrinal correlation analysis to all of the project’s existing data would be a major undertaking many times larger than the present project, the article illustrates how such analysis can be done, and how interesting the revealed patterns can be.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
4.10
自引率
0.00%
发文量
3
审稿时长
16 weeks
期刊最新文献
The Limits of Formalism in the Separation of Powers Putting Freedom of Contract in its Place Large Legal Fictions: Profiling Legal Hallucinations in Large Language Models How Election Rules Affect Who Wins Remote Work and City Decline: Lessons From the Garment District
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1