Search this site

The U.S. Constitution and State Constitutions protect rights (like free speech, due process, fair trial) and limit government power. Introduction Did you know that our United States Constitution is the supreme law of the land ? Indeed, the Constitution carries more weight than any other law. To understand this powerful piece of law, it helps to know why it was made. When the Constitution was drafted, the American colonies had only recently won independence from Britain. During British rule, the colonies were oppressed by the British king. The American public had no say in the laws that governed their lives, nor a way to seek justice if they were harmed by the Crown. The founders sought to prevent this from ever happening again. They wanted power to be in the hands of “The People.” Today, the Constitution remains the source of protection for your rights and liberties.  How The Constitution Is Applied The Constitution sets the standard of what rights are guaranteed to everyone. The standard set by the Constitution is the minimum, so other laws cannot prescribe people less rights than the Constitution prescribes. This principle is called the constitutional floor. State and local laws can grant people more protection than the federal Constitution does, but never less. Essentially, other laws may build upon the constitutional floor. For example, the California State Constitution grants extra rights that aren’t in the Constitution, such as an explicit right to privacy.   The Constitution also prohibits ex post facto  laws. Ex post facto laws turn an act that was legal at the time it happened into a crime after it has already happened. For example, imagine if one day it is legal to purchase bubblegum. Sally purchases bubblegum. A week later, Congress passes a law banning bubblegum purchases, and Sally is arrested and prosecuted for her bubblegum purchase. Sally’s arrest and prosecution would be unconstitutional as ex post facto laws are not allowed. Similarly, the Constitution prohibits Congress from passing Bills of Attainder , or laws that punish without a trial.  Role of the Courts The courts ensure that constitutional protections are not violated through the process called judicial review . There are two ways that a law’s constitutionality can be challenged:  The law is unconstitutional on its face. This means that the written substance of the law violates the Constitution. An example case is Reno v. ACLU , 521 U.S. 844 (1997). The Supreme Court held that parts of the 1996 Communications Decency Act were unconstitutional. Since these parts of the Act were unconstitutional on their own (without application to any particular case), they were unconstitutional on their face. The law is unconstitutional  as applied. This means that the law, when applied to the case, violates the Constitution. An example case is Shuttlesworth v. City of Birmingham , 394 U.S. 147 (1969). In Birmingham, Alabama, a city ordinance required permits for parades and processions, and Reverend Fred Shuttlesworth was convicted for violating this ordinance while he led a peaceful civil rights march. On review, the Supreme Court held that the ordinance was unconstitutionally vague and restricted free speech. The judgment against Reverend Shuttlesworth was reversed. In both of the above Supreme Court cases, the Court took issue with the vagueness or broadness of the respective law. Vagueness and broadness are constitutional red flags because they open up the opportunity for laws to be misinterpreted or interpreted inconsistently. A law is void for vagueness when its wording gives too much discretion to law enforcement, it is inconsistently applied, and it does not provide notice of what is considered criminal. A law is overbroad when it prohibits acts that are constitutionally protected (such as free speech). Your Constitutional Rights Now that you know how Constitutional rights are applied and protected, let’s consider what your rights actually are. The first ten amendments to the Constitution, called the Bill of Rights, list out the rights of the people. In addition to the Bill of Rights, several other important amendments have expanded and clarified the rights of the people and the powers of government. Use the chart below to better understand your Constitutional rights, as recognized in the U.S. Constitution: The Bill of Rights and Other Key Amendments First Amendment freedom of religion freedom of speech  freedom of the press  freedom of assembly the right to protest Second Amendment right to a well-regulated militia for national security right to have and carry firearms Third Amendment No one can be forced to keep soldiers in their home (during peace time). During war time, this is also not allowed, unless a law is passed requiring it. Fourth Amendment no unreasonable searches and seizures no warrants without probable cause warrants must say what will be searched and the persons or things to be seized Fifth Amendment no deprivation of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law no double jeopardy no obligation in any criminal case to be a witness against oneself private property cannot be taken for public use without just compensation  Sixth Amendment right to a speedy and public trial right to an impartial jury right to be informed of the charge(s) right to cross examine with the witnesses against oneself right to gather witnesses in one’s favor right to counsel  Seventh Amendment right to a civil jury trial Eighth Amendment no excessive bail or fines no cruel and unusual punishments Ninth Amendment the rights listed in the Constitution do not deny or reduce other rights Tenth Amendment the states have any powers that the Constitution did not give to the federal government Eleventh Amendment limits the ability of individuals to sue states in federal court Twelfth Amendment Revises the procedure for electing the President and Vice President (separate ballots). Thirteenth Amendment Abolishes slavery and involuntary servitude, except as punishment for a crime. Fourteenth Amendment grants citizenship to all persons born or naturalized in the U.S. guarantees equal protection under the law prohibits states from denying due process The Fifth Amendment is also known as the due process clause. It is the reason a defendant is presumed innocent until proven guilty. The Eighth Amendment prevents a defendant from being punished disproportionately for their crime. However, some recent laws—such as federal mandatory minimums, or the California Three Strikes Law—could be interpreted as violations of the amendment. Death penalty laws have also been altered by the Supreme Court under the Eight Amendment. The Bill of Rights contains some, but not all, rights of defendants. Defendants also have procedural rights, such as the right to appeal. See Criminal Law and Criminal Procedure .  Equal Protection of the Laws The Fourteenth Amendment is a critical part of the Constitution. It contains the Equal Protection Clause. As its name suggests, the clause is the reason that all Constitutional rights are guaranteed equally, both at the federal and state levels. In fact, the Fourteenth Amendment specifically forbids states from denying due process and equal protection to anyone under their authority. Thanks to the Fourteenth Amendment, the Bill of Rights (originally written to apply to the federal level) now applies to the states, too. See   Brown v. Board of Education , 347 U.S. 483 (1954); Gideon v. Wainwright , 372 U.S. 335 (1963); Gitlow v. New York , 268 U.S. 652 (1925); Loving v. Virginia , 388 U.S. 1 (1967); Mapp v. Ohio , 367 U.S. 643 (1961). Limitations  There are also limitations to the Bill of Rights. First Amendment (free speech) limitations prohibit the use of fighting words, incitement to riot, hate speech, and obscenity. An individual cannot use the First Amendment to create a clear and present danger, such as inciting a stampede of people. For example, Supreme Court Justice Holmes wrote in 1919, “you can't yell 'fire' in a crowded theater.” Second Amendment (gun rights) limitations include banning guns from convicted felons and mentally ill individuals. It is also illegal to possess a firearm near a school or government building. Some firearms limitations vary by state, too. To learn about California firearms law, visit the State Firearms (CA) Article  on our website. Conclusion In sum, this article is a reminder that the Constitution, though centuries old, is still relevant to you today. The Constitution protects every individual (thanks to the Fourteenth Amendment), guaranteeing them rights and liberties that people living in other parts of the world may not have. There is also a system of judicial review in place to ensure protection of those rights and liberties. There are also many governmental checks and balances in place (see Federalism & The Branches of Government  to learn more). Since the Constitution is the supreme law of the land, it sets a minimum standard (the constitutional floor) for other laws to follow. While this was an overview, there is always more to learn.

Introduction Did you know that the Supreme Court has its own eras? Indeed, for every Chief Justice’s term, there is an era called the “[Chief Justice’s name] Court.” For example, our current era is known as the Roberts Court, after our current Chief Justice John Roberts. Different eras have distinct impacts on criminal court cases throughout the nation. After all, our criminal court system is a core part of our democracy—ensuring that every accused person’s constitutional rights to a fair trial and an attorney (and more) are upheld. State versus Federal Courts One of the key distinctions within the court system is between federal and state courts. Criminal prosecutions will take place in the respective court for the charge. This means a federal charge is always prosecuted in federal court, and a state charge is always prosecuted in state court.   Jurisdiction  Jurisdiction is defined as a court’s authority to hear a matter. For example, a California court has jurisdiction over cases in California. There are two main types of jurisdiction: original and appellate. Original jurisdiction is the first review of a case. A court with original jurisdiction has the authority to conduct a trial and accept evidence. Appellate jurisdiction refers to the second review, or a court’s power to review an appeal of the trial for error. Sometimes, federal and state jurisdictions overlap (see Overlapping Jurisdictions  to learn more). Federal Courts Federal courts have three tiers: a trial court, intermediate court of appeal, and high court of appeal. These include the following: Tier   Name of the court Federal trial court United States District Court Example: First Street United States Courthouse 350 W 1st St,  Los Angeles, CA 90012 Federal intermediate appellate court United States Court of Appeals (Circuit Courts) Example:  The United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit is the California Circuit. Example court: Richard H. Chambers U.S. Court of Appeals 125 S Grand Ave,  Pasadena, CA 91105 Federal high appeal court United States Supreme Court Example: located in Washington D.C. at  1 First St NE,  Washington, D.C. 20543 Each federal jurisdiction has its own rules that are designed for the court to run efficiently. The federal circuit (intermediate appeal) courts are divided into thirteen courts. Twelve of those courts are divided geographically. One of them (the federal circuit) is specifically for national issues. All thirteen circuits, and how they are divided, are pictured below. Credit: LexisNexis The federal trial court (United States District Court) can hear federal trials. On appeal, these cases move to the United States Courts of Appeals (Circuit Courts). For a final appeal, they can submit a petition called a writ of certiorari  to the United States Supreme Court. However, it is rare to be granted writ (a review) by the United States Supreme Court. If the Supreme Court does not grant writ, then the appeal decision from the Circuit Court is upheld or “affirmed.”  State Courts  The state courts have similar tiers. On appeal, the trial case moves to the intermediate court of appeal usually called the State Court of Appeals. A final level of appeal is the high court of appeal, the State Supreme Court. It is less exclusive than the United States Supreme Court. So long as there is reasonable standing for appeal, the State Supreme Court should hear the appeal. To exemplify, in California the tiers of state courts are: Tier Name of the court State trial court California Superior Court Example:  Torrance Courthouse 825 Maple Ave. Torrance, CA 90503 State intermediate appellate court California Court of Appeals Example: Ronald Reagan State Building 300 S. Spring Street 2nd Floor, North Tower Los Angeles, CA 90013 State high appeal court California Supreme Court Example: Earl Warren Building 350 McAllister Street San Francisco, CA 94102 If a state case involves a federal issue, it can appeal one last time. It can move from the State Supreme Court to the United States Supreme Court. Nevertheless, it is still up to the United States Supreme Court to grant writ (which means allowing the state case to be heard). An example of a state criminal case reaching the Supreme Court is Miranda v. Arizona , 384 U.S. 436 (1966). Miranda confessed to kidnapping and rape during his interrogation, without having been informed of his right to remain silent (Fifth Amendment) and to an attorney (Sixth Amendment). His confession was used as evidence during trial, where he was convicted. Miranda appealed his case all the way to the Arizona Supreme Court, which upheld the conviction. Then, Miranda appealed to the United States Supreme Court, which reversed his conviction and established the “Miranda Rights” rule. Miranda Rights refer to the requirement for law enforcement to inform suspects in law enforcement custody of their constitutional rights, including the right to remain silent and the right to an attorney, before the suspects are questioned.  State versus Federal Judges State and federal courts have different judges.  Federal State Supreme Court Justice Appellate Judge District Judge Magistrate Judge State Supreme Court Justice Appellate Judge Superior Court/Trial Judge Commissioner For an overview of the court system, review the chart below. Conclusion In sum, courts can vary in their jurisdiction (original or appellate) to hear a case and their jurisdiction. Generally, the distinction between the federal and state courts, particularly for criminal charges, is based on whether state or federal law was violated. Nonetheless, there can still be overlap between state and federal authority over a case. You may visit Overlapping Jurisdictions  to learn more. Should you have any questions, don’t hesitate to reach out.

Introduction Criminal laws are made up of elements. You may think of the elements as the “ingredients” of the crime. Each ingredient is necessary to the recipe. Similarly, the government has to prove each element of the criminal charge. Therefore, knowing the elements is crucial to knowing what a strong defense to a charge will be. A strong defense targets the elements. Elements of a Crime Generally, crimes have three elements: An action that is prohibited by law The intent (or state of mind) of the acting individual The concurrence of the action and intention at the same time  Some crimes have a fourth element: causation and harm. This element means the concurrent action and intention caused a harmful or criminal outcome. Examples An example of a three element crime is attempt. Attempt does not require that the crime was completed–so there is no element of causation or harm. The only elements are the action and state of mind which concurrently show the defendant attempted a crime. A four element crime is murder. In addition to the concurrent action and intent of the defendant, the defendant’s conduct must have been the cause of the defendant’s death.  (1) The Act Element The first element of a crime—the act—is also known as the actus reus , which means “guilty act” in Latin. Depending on the crime, the act can be an action a defendant takes, or an action a defendant fails to perform. For example, a defendant takes action to commit a burglary. However, if the defendant has a legal duty to act, failing to do so is also a crime. A defendant can have a legal duty based on: A statute (such as a Good Samaritan Law) A contract (such as employment as a life guard) A special relationship (such as a parent and child) In these cases where there is a legal duty, failing to act (also known as omission to act) is criminal. Another key concept about the act element is that the act must be voluntary. This means that the act was in the defendant’s control. It can be sufficient if one act in a change of events is voluntary. For example, the voluntary act of drinking and then driving is sufficient for criminal liability, even if a subsequent act, like hitting a pedestrian, is involuntary.  (2) The Intent Element The second element of a crime is the intent (or state of mind) of the defendant. This is also known as the mens rea , which means “guilty mind” in Latin. Criminal law focuses on the state of mind because it helps differentiate between an innocent mistake and deliberate action. There are several states of mind that criminal law categorizes as different types of intent. These are explored fully in our Criminal Intent  article. For now, it helps to know that the criminal state of mind generally falls in one of two categories: Intention  Acting knowingly or deliberately to bring about the criminal result Criminal negligence  Acting so recklessly or negligently that it demonstrates a disregard for life A crime has occurred only when the criminal state of mind is paired with the criminal act. (3) The Concurrence Element The final, necessary element for any crime is concurrence between the intent and the act. These elements must concur at the same moment. For example, say Jane plans to murder Joe with a weapon. She drives to Joe’s house with the weapon in her car. Jane doesn’t see Joe in the street and accidentally hits him. Hitting Joe with the car by accident lacks the intent for murder, which is malice. At the moment Jane hit Joe, she did not do so maliciously. Hence, if Jane was driving recklessly, she may be charged with manslaughter, but her intent would likely not rise to the level of malice for murder.  The (Sometimes) Fourth Element All crimes require the concurrent act and intent. Some crimes are satisfied with just these three elements. An example is inchoate (or incomplete) crimes, such as attempt, conspiracy, and solicitation. These crimes do not need to be completed to cause a criminal result or harm. The attempt, planning, or solicitation of the crime is a crime in itself. By contrast, other crimes require a fourth element: causation and harm. Causation and harm means the defendant’s conduct (the concurring intent and act) directly or substantially caused the criminal result or harm. You will learn more about this in our  Causation and Harm  article. Where to Find the Elements of a Crime The elements of a crime are found in the statute that defines the crime. Elements are also listed in the jury instructions for the crime. This is because the jury must know what the elements are so that they can decide if the prosecution has proved each element beyond a reasonable doubt. In some states, there are common law crimes, which are defined by common law rather than statute. For these crimes, the elements are written in common law. California does not have common law crimes. Instead, crimes are defined in the statute (California Penal Code) and jury instructions. For example, robbery requires four key elements: 1) the unlawful taking of another person’s property; 2) through the use of force or fear; 3) with the intent to permanently deprive the person of that property; 4) causing harm or the threat of harm. It is important to note that the intent and the use of force or fear must occur at the same time, meaning the defendant intended to steal while using force or fear to take the item. If the prosecution fails to prove any of these elements beyond a reasonable doubt, then the defense may be successful. Conclusion In conclusion, every crime generally has three elements: the act, intent, and their concurrence at the same time. Some crimes also have a fourth element: causation and harm. At trial, the government must prove each element of the crime beyond a reasonable doubt to convict the defendant. You can learn more about this through our What Is Beyond a Reasonable Doubt?  article. All in all, the elements of a crime are critical to its defense.

Criminal law defines crimes and punishments. Criminal procedure defines individual rights by providing the rules of how investigations, arrests, and trials are carried out. Introduction Criminal law and criminal procedure are part of our daily lives, even when we do not interact directly with the police or courts. We go about our days trusting that criminal laws will help to deter crime and improve our safety. We also trust that our security and individual rights will be protected by criminal procedure. A person who is accused of a crime can expect to have the right to a fair and speedy trial, access to an attorney, the right to remain silent, and more. Both criminal law and criminal procedure connect to the value we place on our freedom and privacy—and the checks we place on the government’s power to take those things away. Although they are interlinked, criminal law and criminal procedure differ significantly. Each has a different aim and focus. Criminal law focuses on defining crimes, their elements, and punishments. Criminal procedure focuses on defining the rules for the legal process so that individual rights can be protected. Procedure regulates every step: from investigation to search, arrest, interrogation, trial, and sentencing. Read on to learn more about the distinctions between—and equal importance of—criminal law and criminal procedure.  What Is Criminal Law?  Criminal law is a type of substantive law . Substantive law is the body of law that creates and defines duties, rights, punishments, and more. The sources of substantive criminal law include common law, the Constitution (federal and state versions), statutes, and case law. Statutes are laws passed by the government. Examples include federal statutes such as the United States Code and state statutes such as the California Penal Code. Both federal and state criminal laws look to the Model Penal Code as a guiding framework. On a local level, there are even city or municipal codes to define crimes.  These sources of substantive law can answer key criminal law questions. For example: jury instructions tell us what the elements are, and statute or common law define the offense. As a sample, consider the California Penal Code Section 187  (a statute) which defines the offense of murder in California. The elements of the murder charge are found in the jury instruction CALCRIM No. 520 .  Criminal Procedure Criminal procedure is a type of procedural law . Procedural law enforces the duties, rights, and punishments created by substantive law. Sources of criminal procedure include the U.S. Constitution, Criminal Rules of Procedure, Rules of Evidence, and Sentencing Guidelines. The sources can also answer key criminal procedure questions. For example: In sum, criminal law and criminal procedure draw from similar sources to meet different goals. Criminal law focuses on creating definitions that the public can rely on. Criminal procedure focuses on regulating a standardized process to enforce equal protection.  Conclusion Perhaps you used to loop together criminal law and criminal procedure. Now you know the key ways that they differ, and why this distinction is important to all. However, this is a broad overview, and there is always more to learn. Should you have any questions, don’t hesitate to reach out.

Criminal law generally involves government action and punishment for violation of criminal laws including prison and fines. Civil law generally involves individual people suing each other for money or rights. Introduction Civil law and criminal law are part of our daily lives. Civil law provides us a system for resolving disputes. Civil law can restore losses or compensate for damages that result from harm. Civil law also enforces private rights, property rights, contracts, and more. Criminal law is designed to uphold public safety. It defines crimes and determines what their punishments should be. Although they both serve the public, civil law and criminal law differ in key ways. Read on to learn more. Core Differences In civil cases, the plaintiff files the lawsuit against the defendant. The outcome the plaintiff seeks is to stop the harm or compensate for the harm caused. The compensation is usually “damages,” which is a payment of money from the defendant to the plaintiff. In criminal cases, the government prosecutes the defendant. In federal criminal cases, the case is titled “ United States v.  [       ]” while state criminal cases are titled “ The People of the State of ____  [       ] v. [       ].” The outcome that the United States or the People seek is punishment for a violation of the law, and restitution for the victim of a crime.  Across the country, the different goals of civil and criminal cases highlight another distinction: civil cases generally require a victim and harm. Otherwise, there would be no damages to seek. By contrast, criminal cases can be victimless or without harm. For example, someone can violate firearms law for keeping their gun in their car’s glovebox. Although they did not use their gun to harm someone, they can be charged with a crime in California. (See Firearms in CA Article ) The goal here would be to deter criminal behavior and protect the public from harm.  Burden of Proof Another key difference is the burden of proof required in civil and criminal cases. For a civil case, the burden of proof is lower. It is called a preponderance of evidence. A preponderance of evidence means that the allegations are more likely to be true than not true. A common analogy for this standard is 51% of the weight in favor of the plaintiff and 49% in favor of the defendant. For criminal cases, the burden of proof is beyond a reasonable doubt. This is a much higher burden for the prosecution to prove to a jury.   Level of Protection In the context of trial, criminal defendants  have more legal protection than civil defendants. A criminal defendants’ liberty is at stake. Liberty warrants higher protection. There are Constitutional Amendments that specifically protect the criminally accused. The 5th, 6th, and 8th Amendments provide criminal defendants with due process rights, including the right to remain silent, the right to an attorney if they cannot afford one, protection against excessive bail or fines, and more. By contrast, the 7th Amendment specifically references civil law, guaranteeing the right to a civil jury trial. Closely related is the 14th Amendment, which guarantees the civil right of equal protection of the laws. Yet there is a clear difference in the level of Constitutional protections applied to trial. For instance, a criminal defendant does not have to testify at all. A civil defendant who cannot afford a lawyer won’t  be granted a public defender, but a criminal defendant charged with a felony will be granted one.  Conclusion In sum, civil and criminal law differ significantly:                                                                                      Criminal Law Civil Law Purpose To regulate conduct in order to protect public interest. To enforce private rights and resolve civil disputes. Goal To deter criminal behavior and protect the public from harm To make the victim “whole” Burden of Proof Beyond Reasonable Doubt Preponderance of Evidence Does there have to be a victim or harm? No Yes, generally (with some exceptions) However, both civil and criminal law are designed to serve the public. While civil law enforces private rights, criminal law enforces public interest. Indeed, there are circumstances where a civil lawsuit and criminal prosecution arise for the same set of facts. For example, if a person commits a hit and run crime, and the victim is injured—there can be a criminal prosecution for the hit and run  and a civil lawsuit for the injury. Moreover, this does not violate double jeopardy (the right to not be prosecuted twice for the same charge). Clearly, every case is unique and there is always more to learn.

Criminal law generally involves government action and punishment for violation of criminal laws including prison and fines. Civil law generally involves individual people suing each other for money or rights. Introduction Classification is a critical part of the criminal justice process. The classification of a crime determines what direction the stages of the criminal justice process will take. For instance, a crime’s classification impacts pretrial release (bail and bond), diversion, sentencing, and parole outcomes. Classification even impacts what court will oversee proceedings, and what jail or prison a defendant may be sent to. Thus, classification has a domino effect. Read on to learn more about how crimes are classified. Common Law Origins The modern system for classifying crimes is not entirely new. Indeed, classification dates back hundreds of years to the common law. Common law originates from England, materializing in U.S. law through the American colonies. Common law classified crimes more narrowly than we do today. At common law, there were only three categories of crime: treasons, felonies, and misdemeanors. Modern law expanded crime classification—using courts and statutes—to recognize nuance. Grading of Crimes The primary way that crimes are classified is through grading. Grading refers to organizing crimes by their offense level. Offense levels  are based on the severity of the crime. Crimes are graded as follows, from highest to lowest offense level: Felonies Ex. murder, rape, first degree burglary Misdemeanors Ex. petty theft, trespass, assault Infractions Ex. minor traffic offenses, littering, parking violation In California, some crimes are wobblers . Wobbler crimes can be charged as felony or misdemeanor, depending on the circumstances of the case. For example, a simple assault could be charged as a misdemeanor. However, circumstances may elevate the offense level to a felony—such as if a deadly weapon was brandished. Overall, wobblers exemplify how modern law has expanded from common law.  Categories of Crimes At both common law and modern law, felonies and misdemeanors can be further categorized into types of crimes. The types of crimes include crimes against the person, property, and inchoate crimes. Examples of each include: Crimes Against Persons Ex. Homicide, battery, assault, false imprisonment, kidnapping, rape, robbery Crimes Against Property  Ex. Theft, embezzlement, fraud, extortion, blackmail, bribery,  receiving stolen property, arson, burglary, robbery Inchoate Crimes  Ex. Attempt, conspiracy, solicitation You may notice that there is some overlap between categories. For example, robbery can be both a crime against a person and a crime against property, as it involves the use or threat of violence against a person in order to take property.  Similarly, burglary can impact a home (habitation) or general property. Other circumstances of a burglary—such as if it also caused harm to people—may cause it to expand to a crime against persons too. Moral or Legal Crimes Also stemming from common law are the principles of malum in se   and malum prohibitum . Malum in se  crimes are accepted as inherently  evil or wrong by most cultures (such as  murder). On the other hand, malum prohibitum  is an act that is determined  wrong by the law. For instance, driving at 25 miles per hour may not be inherently evil—but it is determined wrong if it exceeds a given speed limit. Since the act is prohibited by law, it is malum prohibitum .  Moral turpitude  is a concept closely related to malum in se  (inherently evil or wrong) crimes. Moral turpitude means committing an act that is immoral, depraved, or against justice. Being found guilty of a moral turpitude crime can impact immigration, licensing, and employment. Examples are crimes involving violence (murder), deceit (fraud), and more. Conclusion When we are examining potential punishment related to a crime, it is important to determine whether the crime is a felony, misdemeanor, or infraction. This distinction will indicate not only the level of punishment, but it may also impact the criminal procedure rights, including the right to a jury trial or the right to appointed counsel depending upon the classification.  Should you have any questions, don’t hesitate to reach out.is unique and there is always more to learn.

Introduction Jurisdiction is meant to protect a defendant—ensuring they are heard in a court with adequate resources and authority over their case. It is of paramount importance that the court hearing a defendant’s case has sufficient—but not unnecessary or excessive—authority. This issue is increasingly important when jurisdictions overlap, and several courts have authority to hear the case. This article will outline what jurisdiction is, as well as the effect that overlapping jurisdiction can have on a case. What is jurisdiction?  Jurisdiction is defined as a court’s authority to hear a matter. For example, an appellate court has the authority to hear appeals cases, whereas a district court has authority to hear trials. Jurisdiction is also a geographic area over which a court has authority. For example, a California court has jurisdiction over cases arising in California. There are different types of jurisdiction:   Original jurisdiction  is the first review of a case. A court with original jurisdiction has the authority to conduct a trial and accept evidence.  Appellate jurisdiction  refers to authority to conduct a second review to look for error. Exclusive jurisdiction  means that only the specific court has the authority to process the case. Overlapping (or concurrent) jurisdiction  means several courts share jurisdiction.  Where does jurisdiction come from?   Federalism is the principle that underlies the structure of American government. Federalism establishes a separation between state and federal governments. There are separate state and federal laws, courts, and jurisdictions. The Constitution outlines what jurisdiction belongs to the state and federal government.   State versus federal jurisdiction State jurisdiction is the state’s authority to hear state cases, whether at a state trial court or state appeal court. State jurisdiction usually arises from a state law being violated within state territory. Violations of state criminal law can be infractions, misdemeanors, or felonies based on their severity. You can learn more through What To Expect In A State Criminal Case .  Similarly, federal jurisdiction arises when a federal law is violated, the conduct crosses state boundaries (e.g., a drug trafficking operation across state lines), or residents of several states are involved. Visit What To Expect In A Federal Criminal Case  to learn more. This is also discussed further in our Difference between state and federal charges . How can jurisdiction overlap?   The difference between state and federal jurisdiction can seem clear-cut. However, there is a gray area where the jurisdictions overlap. This gray area is called overlapping, or “concurrent” jurisdiction. State and federal authorities have overlapping legal authority to prosecute a crime depending on the circumstances. Some crimes violate both state and federal laws. Drug trafficking offenses are one example. Other crimes violate state laws but happen on federal property. For example, simple possession of a drug (in a small amount for personal use) is typically a state charge. However, simple possession on a federal military base, which is federal property, invokes a charge in federal court where state law may be used to determine whether a crime was committed. Another example is when someone violates a state law (DUI, robbery, theft, etc.) at a national park—which is federal property.  You can learn more about this kind of case through CVB Cases . What happens when jurisdiction overlaps?   In some cases where jurisdiction overlaps, the prosecutor or charging authority must decide which court to refer the case to and which laws apply—federal or state. This decision is made based on several factors. While considering the specific interests of justice, the prosecution strategizes based on the available resources in either court and the overall likelihood of the case’s success. For instance, a charging authority or prosecutor will likely refer a ‘simple drug possession at the airport’ case to state court, even though it occurred on federal property (the airport). This is because state courts traditionally adjudicate simple possession cases, while federal court resources are reserved for higher-level offenses.  Jurisdiction as a defense  As spotlighted earlier, the aim of jurisdiction is to protect a defendant by ensuring their case is processed by a court with sufficient authority and resources. In line with this principle, jurisdiction can be a defense. For instance, jurisdiction is an element of the offense in federal court. A federal prosecutor must prove that the federal court has jurisdiction over the case, whether it be due to violation of a federal law, involvement of a federal issue, the offense occurring on federal land, or other relevant circumstances. If the federal prosecutor fails to prove federal jurisdiction, the judge or jury  must acquit the defendant of the crime. To learn more about criminal defenses, visit this link.   Conclusion In summary, a defendant has the right to be fairly heard, and this can only happen at a court with authority over the case. Prosecutors have a responsibility to this right when determining which jurisdiction should prosecute the case. Defense attorneys must act as diligent referees, alerting the judge when they believe an unfair overreach has occurred. Jurisdiction can even be used as a defense when a defense attorney argues that the court does not have authority over the case.  As always, should you have any questions, don’t hesitate to reach out. You may also review the resources below.

A crime is an act (or failure to act) that violates the law and is punishable by the government. Elements of a crime If you're wondering, “Did I commit a crime?” , the law starts with a basic definition: a crime is an act committed in violation of the law.  Another way to understand criminal law is through understanding what it is not . Criminal law is different from civil law . Criminal law does not require an injury or that a crime was actually completed. For example, attempted murder is still a crime whether the victim was murdered or not. By comparison, civil law generally requires injury or harm. In civil law, money (damages) are the penalty for the harm. In criminal law, the penalty for the crime could be imprisonment, fines, restitution, and more. This core difference is illustrated below.  Additionally, criminal law defines crimes by their elements . Below, let’s consider the elements of a crime: the guilty act, guilty mind, concurrence, and (sometimes) causation.  Guilty Act: Actus Reus One core element of a crime is the “guilty act.” This is known as the actus reus .  The actus reus is the voluntary act that the defendant committed. The actus reus can also be a failure to act or an omission, where the defendant had a legal duty and could reasonably perform that duty.   Guilty Mind: Mens Rea Generally, before an act can be considered a crime, the “guilty act” must be accompanied by a “guilty mind.” The guilty mind is called the mens rea . The mens rea is the state of mind that signifies what the defendant’s intentions were while committing the actus reus. The state of mind is often referred to as the defendant’s intent . Concurrence A crime happens when the guilty mind and guilty act happen together . Therefore, concurrence means the mens rea and actus reus must coincide at the same moment. What Is General Intent vs. Specific Intent? General intent  is intent  to commit the crime. It is a mens rea where the defendant is generally aware of all the factors amounting to a crime. General intent can usually be surmised from the actions themselves. For instance, crimes of battery  and false imprisonment  require general intent.  On the other hand,  specific intent  means the defendant did not only intend to act, but intended to act for a criminal purpose . The defendant has a specific objective, which is to bring about the specific crime. This is best demonstrated by examples of specific intent crimes, such as attempt. To be guilty of attempt, a defendant has to specifically intend that the crime will be completed. Causation For some crimes, concurrence between the mens rea and actus reus is enough to establish guilt. For other crimes, there is a final element to be established: causation. Causation requires that the concurrence of the guilty mind and guilty act caused the criminal result. Causation can be actual or proximate. Actual causation , or “cause-in-fact” causation, means there is a direct link between the concurrence and outcome. An example of actual causation is the defendant throwing a rock at the victim, hitting them in the head, and causing a serious injury. But for the defendant throwing the rock, the injury wouldn’t have happened, so actual causation is clear.  Proximate causation  means there is a substantial link between the concurrence and the outcome. For example, if the defendant throws a rock at a group of people. A person tries to dodge it, trips, and hits their head on a fire hydrant. The defendant didn’t directly cause the head injury, but it was a foreseeable consequence of throwing a rock into a crowd. As a result, proximate causation may still be found. Conclusion In sum, this was an overview of the definition of a crime. You learned about the core elements of crime: a mens rea   in concurrence with  an actus reus.  You learned that some crimes require proof of the concurrence   causing a criminal result. While this overview was quite comprehensive, there is always more to learn. Should you have any questions, don’t hesitate to reach out.