The Ethics Of The California Penal Code Essay

In accordance to the Penal Law, Murder in the first degree is defined “With intent to cause the death of another person, he causes the death of such person… the victim was killed while the defendant was in the course of committing / attempting to commit in furtherance of robbery [or other such felonies.]{§125.27(1)(a)(vii)}” This is also known as

The criminal justice system is composed of three parts – Police, Courts and Corrections – and all three work together to protect an individual’s rights and the rights of society to live without fear of being a victim of crime. According to merriam-webster.com, crime is defined as “an act that is forbidden or omission of a duty that is commanded by public law and that makes the offender liable to punishment by that law.” When all the three parts work together, it makes the criminal justice system function like a well tuned machine.

With regards to the issues mentioned above the Law Commission proposed that murder should be reformed by dividing it up into two separate offences; first degree murder; and second degree murder. First degree murder would cover cases where the D intended to kill and where D intended to inflict serious harm and was aware of the risk of death. Second degree murder would include cases where the D intended to do serious harm but was not aware there was a risk of

Capital punishment first established date as far back as the 18th century B.C. There were 25 different crimes for the death penalty. This made death the only punishment for all crimes. Death sentences were carried out by such means as crucifixion, drowning, beating to death, burning alive, and impalement.

AB 109 and AB 117 were introduced to ease the pressure of the federal and state budget through saving costs on the penitentiary system. In this regard, the reduction of the prison population and the transfer of a part of the prison population to county jails was one of the main provisions of AB 109 but AB 117 actually discharges provisions of AB 109. Such a paradoxical situation is the result of scarce financial resources to fund the penitentiary system at both the federal and local level. In order to reduce the pressure on the penitentiary system at the federal level, the decision to transfer the prison population to county jails or to release the

Murder is the intentional killing of another human being, with premeditation (in other words, the killing was planned). Common law defines murder by a number of requirements. It must be unlawful (an executioner assisting in a state execution cannot be charged with murder). As previously mentioned, it must be an act committed by one human being by another (a person crashing their car into a tree did not commit a murder, neither is the killing of an animal considered murder). There must also be malice aforethought -- premeditation towards

In the case of Robinson v. California, 370 U.S. 660 (1962), the Supreme Court ruled that a law may not punish a status; i.e., one may not be punished to being an alcoholic or for being addicted to drugs. However, of course, one may be punished for actions such as abusing drugs. The question becomes; What if the status “forces” the action? What if a person, because of his/her addiction to drugs, is “forced” by the addiction to purchase and abuse the illegal drugs? Would punishing that person be unfairly punishing a status?

To be found guilty of first degree murder, it must be proven that killed someone with malice aforethought, meaning it was planned, premeditated. First degree murder is to kill malevolence, to kill either intentionally and deliberately or recklessly with the utmost disregard for human life. Premeditation may be fashioned immediately and does not require a lengthy period of contemplation. The death penalty is recognized in Thirty-eight states. Capital first-degree murder or aggravated first-degree murder is categorized in killings viewed as deserving of capital punishment. Life imprisonment or death penalty is the punishment resulted in a conviction. States who do not recognized the death penalty, aggravated murder carries life imprisonment.

No matter what job you have in the criminal justice system there will always be ethical dilemmas that arise. As a person who’s job is to enforce the law there is always a way to step over the boundaries whether it be unfair treatment to citizens, inmates or agencies. There is always areas of the career to consider and in order to make everyone happy there are steps that need to be taken. From the police officer on the street to the parole board there is always something that could come up which could have consequences for either decision so which is the right one?

“Ethical issues regarding corruption and off-duty behavior have become an increasing challenge in criminal justice” (Writing, 1999-2013). Within the criminal justice system, ethics can be complicated by the moral implications of actions. Differences in cultures and different circumstances can affect the individual moral compass. However, all departments of criminal justice operate by a certain code of ethics and by certain standards. But those standards and ethics often become challenged due to issues relating to police brutality, off duty conduct and corruption that we hear about all of the time through the media.

Murder, a common occurrence in American society, is thought of as a horrible, reprehensible atrocity. Why then, is it thought of differently when the state government arranges and executes a human being, the very definition of premeditated murder? Capital punishment has been reviewed and studied for many years, exposing several inequities and weaknesses, showing the need for the death penalty to be abolished.

The criminal justice system plays an important role in this society, it is meant to protect and serve. This “system” is also meant to maintain the peace and enforce the laws set by the government. However, the criminal justice system is not even close to perfect. It has many flaws, some of which are: police brutality, death penalty, mass incarceration, gun violence, and especially wrongful convictions. A majority of the flaws that the system has can be easily fixed and can be set straight. For example, the issue of wrongful convictions has been relevant for quite some time and has the potential to decrease its probability of occurring by focusing on the importance of scientific evidence, rid of faulty witness testimonies, and make sure that the lack of evidence and/or government misconduct, if applicable, does not determine the outcome of the case.

Murder has not always been defined by degrees by which the act took place, before the separation began, murder of any type was a capital offense punishable by death. The state of Pennsylvania in 1793 was the first state to legally distinguish different degrees of murder, possibly to reduce the amount of murders that resulted in capital punishment (Levinson, 2002). In most states today, first degree murder is commonly defined as the unlawful, willing, and premeditated murder of another human being committed with malice aforethought, which is used to indicate a person intended to kill another person (Berman, n.d.). All states approach murder charges with variations on the same basic principle, intent.

In order to keep a safe society, it is important to establish a nation with

When it comes to large sums of money, it is not uncommon for the spender to feel they have been ripped off or become over protected. The practice of law is no exception to this phenomenon, and crocked lawyers and paralegals have negatively contributed to the notion. On several occasions law professionals have taken client money for personal use, acting against the law and rules of professional conduct. Although lawyers and paralegals have their own individual rules and guidelines to abide by, they follow the same professional structure of proper conduct. The rules of conduct for paralegals is governed by the Law Society of Upper Canada and is the governing body responsible for reports of misconduct. Further investigations will lay out the proper procedures and tasks that must be completed when a paralegal encounters an accusations of misconduct, specifically when a client accuses a paralegal of misappropriating money from the clients trust fund. When it comes to possible options it is important to remember that by proactively sending a report of the circumstance to the Law Society of Upper Canada with a detailed list of events, bookkeeping and accounts billed to the client will help your case prior to the client reporting you to the Law Society. Should a paralegal choose to ignore the threat of the client, in hopes that the client will not follow through with higher involvement, the paralegal will then face an audit by the Law Society. If the Law Society is apprised that the