Criminal Law Consulting
​For Writers & Filmmakers
  • Home
  • About
  • Services
  • Resources
  • Blog
  • Contact
  • Free eBook

When Kids Commit Crimes

11/11/2011

2 Comments

 
When kids commit crimes, they can end up in the juvenile justice system.  In many ways, juvenile criminal law is its own unique system.  There is some overlap with the adult criminal justice system, but there are many key differences.  

The ostensible purpose of the juvenile justice system is to try to rehabilitate children who have gone astray.  The theory is that children who have committed crimes may simply be misguided, and there is still hope to save them from a life of crime.  For the most part, adult offenders are considered to be beyond rehabilitation, and the primary goals of the criminal justice system are to punish and prevent further crime through deterrence and incapacitation.

Juveniles have different courts and different rights.  Usually children have less rights than adults.  On the flip side, juvenile offenses usually do not carry the same stigma or harsh consequences as adult convictions.   

Like adults, juveniles have a right to an attorney.  Unlike adults, however, they have no right to a jury trial.  Juvenile court judges  have tremendous discretion when deciding what happens to a child who has committed a crime - they can send the child home, to a group home placement, to treatment, or to juvenile hall.  If a minor fails in one setting, the judge may try a different one.  Minors also have less right to privacy compared to adults, so they can be searched under circumstances where an adult could not, like at school. 

Sometimes a court will decide that a particular child who committed a particular crime should be tried as an adult.  This may happen if the child is particularly mature or the crime was particularly sophisticated or violent.  When that happens, the case is transferred to a regular adult criminal court.  At that point, all the rights, procedures and protections that normally apply to adults then apply to the child.
2 Comments

Teen Hate-Crime Trial Exemplifies Murder versus Voluntary Manslaughter

9/21/2011

4 Comments

 
A common question people ask is what is the difference between murder and manslaughter?  The definitions of these crimes vary somewhat from state to state, but a recent California trial provides a good example for generally understanding what constitutes murder versus voluntary manslaughter.

A 14 year old eighth grader shot and killed an openly gay 15 year old classmate.  Evidence showed Larry King had worn high heels and makeup to school, and that he often teased Brandon McInerney.  McInerney brought a gun to school and shot King twice in the back of the head while they were in English class.  He had told a friend the day before that he planned to bring a gun to school the next day.

McInerney was tried as an adult.  The prosecution theory was that this was a first-degree murder, planned, contemplated and discussed in advance, and carried out with conscious intent to kill.  The defense presented the case of an overwhelmed child who felt sexually harassed by the gay teen's unwanted attention and snapped.  There was no dispute that McInerney pulled the trigger.  The only question was his state of mind.

Murder in California is a killing with malice aforethought.  Malice is found when the defendant intended to kill.  If a murder is committed with premeditation and deliberation, it is first-degree murder.  (There are other ways of elevating a murder from second to first degree, but they aren't relevant here.)

A murder can be reduced to voluntary manslaughter if the person acted in the heat of passion.  A killing in the heat of passion requires 1) that the defendant was provoked, 2) that the provocation caused the defendant to act rashly and under the influence of intense emotion that obscured his judgment and reasoning, and 3) the provocation would have caused the average person to act rashly.  In other words, the defendant was so provoked by what the victim did, and reasonably so, that he acted out of intense emotion rather than deliberate judgment.

The jury was unable to make a decision in this case, and a mistrial was declared.  McInerney will have to be tried again.  The jury simply could not decide whether McInerney acted deliberately or in the heat of passion.

UPDATE 11/21/11:  McInerney pled guilty to second-degree murder and voluntary manslaughter, accepting a sentence of 21 years in prison, and avoiding a second trial.

For more about the differences between murder and manslaughter, check out the Resources section. 
4 Comments
    Get your FREE E-Book revealing The Top 7 Mistakes Made by Writers of Crime, Mystery and Legal Drama:
    Send My Free E-Book!

    Author

    Blythe Leszkay is a successful and experienced criminal attorney, criminal law professor, and consultant to writers and filmmakers.  See About Me.  This blog is intended to answer common criminal law questions, dispel misconceptions, and explain misunderstood criminal law concepts.  It is also a place to discuss any crime or law related topics of interest.  Contact me for a free initial consultation on your film or writing project.

    Categories

    All
    Appeals
    Burden Of Proof
    Celebrity Crime
    Common Questions
    Constitution
    Consulting Services
    Courtroom
    Crime In The News
    Crime Novels
    Crime Tv
    Death Penalty
    Defenses
    Evidence
    Extortion
    Hate Crimes
    International Crime
    Juvenile Crime
    Legal Comedy
    Legal Definitions
    Legal Drama
    Manslaughter
    Movies
    Murder
    Search And Seizure
    Serial Killers
    Sex Crimes
    Supreme Court
    Trial
    True Crime
    Writing Tips

    RSS Feed

      Get Email Updates

    Join!
    Loading
Powered by Create your own unique website with customizable templates.