Option #1: Criminal Law Hypothetical Fact Pattern Case Study
Read the following hypothetical fact pattern, then write an 8- to 10-page paper that answers the questions listed below.
Fact Pattern:
Amanda and Ben were desperate for money. They had recently been evicted and had nowhere to go. After drinking alcohol to the point of intoxication, they hatched a plan to drive to the nicer part of town and break into a few houses. Their plan was to steal some items to sell to a pawn shop to get some cash. They stopped at one house that they thought was vacant. They broke in the back door and to their surprise, Occupant Owen came downstairs with a gun and started shooting at them. Occupant Owen shot Ben in the leg. Ben had his own firearm on him and shot Occupant Owen in the heart. Occupant Owen died nearly immediately. Amanda and Ben were terrified by what had just happened and decided to leave.
As they drove off, they did not see Homeless Hank lying on a sidewalk nearby. Amanda was driving and, as she was intoxicated and speeding, she did not see him. She hit him and continued driving. Luckily, a nearby police officer, Police Officer Patty, was approaching Homeless Hank. She was about to talk to Homeless Hank about where he was sitting to direct him to move per the applicable local ordinance as he had been lying in the same spot for at least the last four (4) hours.
The local ordinance stated:
It shall be unlawful for any individual to remain lying on the sidewalk, sitting on the public sidewalk or on any object on the sidewalk for more than one hour in any two-hour time period.
Police Officer Patty saw the hit and run and immediately called an ambulance.
Homeless Hank was rushed to the emergency room by ambulance. Dr. Dave had seen Homeless Hank a number of times before in the emergency room for various ailments. Homeless Hank often commented during previous visits on how he had a good life, but now he wanted it to end. Dr. Dave always did his best to fix Homeless Hank’s injuries or maladies.
When Homeless Hank came in this night, after being hit by the car, he once again asked Dr. Dave to put him out of his misery. Dr. Dave evaluated the situation. Homeless Hank’s injuries appeared terminal. Dr. Dave decided not to take any life-saving measures. He gave Homeless Hank morphine to take away the pain. He directed Homeless Hank that he could turn up the morphine drip if he wanted the pain to go away permanently. As Dr. Dave walked out of the room, Homeless Hank turned up the morphine drip. He died not too long after.
Instructions:
Do the following in your paper:
· include an introduction;
· identify the crimes committed by all relevant parties in this fact pattern and evaluate the nature and purpose of criminal law as it relates to these crimes;
· describe any justification or excuse defenses that apply;
· explain any constitutional doctrines that limit criminal law in this scenario;
· discuss the appropriate punishment that each should receive in terms of punishment theory; and
· explain any public policy reasons that support criminal liability (or not) for each defendant.
Your paper must clearly demonstrate your understanding of criminal law concepts. That is, do not simply reference them; instead, be sure to define the elements of each crime or doctrine and apply facts from the Fact Pattern to prove or disprove each element. Use clear headings to identify each of the necessary sections in this paper.
· Your paper should be 8-10 pages in length and conform to the APA formatting
· Include at least four scholarly references in addition to the course textbook. The CSU Global Library is a good place to find these references.
Option #2: Criminal Law: Case Studies from Two Real Cases
1. Choose two of the following criminal defendants for in-depth case study examination:
· Andrea Yates
· OJ Simpson (burglary case)
· Charles Manson
· Ted Kaczynski
· Ted Bundy
· Timothy McVeigh
· Lorena Bobbit
· Jodie Arias
· Jack Kevorkian
2. Explain the facts of each of your two case selections. Identify the crimes that were committed by the two selected defendants. Be sure to identify the actual elements of the crimes that occurred, including the relevant state or federal statute. Address the defense raised in each case.
3. Explain the result in each of the two cases. Determine what legal doctrines in criminal law apply and what public-policy reasons support the result. Keep in mind that these famous convicted criminals tend to be known for one main crime, but usually committed several crimes. Be sure to identify all the possible crimes that occurred under the facts (even if the prosecutor did not charge for them).
4. Explain the punishment that occurred in each case in terms of relevant punishment theory, assessing whether the theory is met.
Your essay must clearly demonstrate your understanding of the criminal law concepts. Do not simply reference them; instead, be sure to define the elements of each crime or doctrine and apply facts from the cases researched to prove or disprove each element. Use clear headings to identify each of the necessary sections in this paper.
Do the following in your paper:
· include an introduction;
· identify the crimes committed by the selected two criminal law defendants and evaluate the nature and purpose of criminal law as it relates to these crimes;
· describe any justification or excuse defenses that were raised;
· explain any constitutional doctrines that limited criminal law in either scenario;
· discuss the punishment that each received in terms of punishment theory, identifying whether the goal of the theory was met; and
· explain any public-policy reasons that support criminal liability (or not) for each defendant.
Submission:
· Your paper should be 8-10 pages in length and conform to the APA formatting
· Include at least four scholarly references in addition to the course textbook.
