Criminal Law Argument One: Sharon Term Paper

PAGES
6
WORDS
1767
Cite

To distinguish battery from assault, the major deciding factor is whether there has been an actual touching of the victim. If so, the crime can only be battery. However, if there has been no such touching, then the act may or may not constitute an assault, depending on the circumstances and the wording of the law.

All jurisdictions include certain aggravating factors that raise a simple assault to an aggravated assault, which are typically felonies. These aggravating circumstances include using a dangerous or deadly weapon and/or having the intent to rape, maim or murder...

...

In the case at hand, if Sharon had missed her husband, her act would most likely be held as an aggravated assault. However, once the contact or offensive touching occurs, the act becomes a one of battery.
Bibliography

Klotter, John C., and Joycelyn M. Pollock. (2006): Criminal Law. 8th ed. Newark: LexisNexis Matthew Bender.

Padfield, Nicola. (2004): Criminal Law. 4th ed. New York: Oxford University Press.

Dix, George E. (2001): Gilbert Law Summaries: Criminal Law. Barbri Group.

Dressler, Joshua, and Frank R. Strong. (2006): Understanding Criminal Law. Newark: LexisNexis Matthew Bender.

Singer, Richard G., and John Q. LaFond. (2004): Criminal Law: Examples and Explanations. Aspen Publishers, Inc.

LaFave, Wayne. (2003): Criminal Law Hornbook. Minneapolis: West Group.

Sources Used in Documents:

Bibliography

Klotter, John C., and Joycelyn M. Pollock. (2006): Criminal Law. 8th ed. Newark: LexisNexis Matthew Bender.

Padfield, Nicola. (2004): Criminal Law. 4th ed. New York: Oxford University Press.

Dix, George E. (2001): Gilbert Law Summaries: Criminal Law. Barbri Group.

Dressler, Joshua, and Frank R. Strong. (2006): Understanding Criminal Law. Newark: LexisNexis Matthew Bender.


Cite this Document:

"Criminal Law Argument One Sharon" (2007, April 30) Retrieved April 19, 2024, from
https://www.paperdue.com/essay/criminal-law-argument-one-sharon-38071

"Criminal Law Argument One Sharon" 30 April 2007. Web.19 April. 2024. <
https://www.paperdue.com/essay/criminal-law-argument-one-sharon-38071>

"Criminal Law Argument One Sharon", 30 April 2007, Accessed.19 April. 2024,
https://www.paperdue.com/essay/criminal-law-argument-one-sharon-38071

Related Documents

court of criminal appeals of Texas, PD-0307-09 Ronald Wilson, and appellant v the State of Texas. (CCA (a), n. d.) The court of Appeals case was: 04-07-00737-CR, and was affirmed. The appeal came from the trial court: 290th District Court of the Bexar County. The case number there was 2006CR2564 and the judge was Sharon S. Macrae. (Texas Court of Criminal Appeals, 2009) What it was basically about The trial of

Judicial Impropriety in United States Supreme Court A judicial impropriety occurs when a judge disregards existing legal standards expected of him /her when they are discharging their roles during judicial proceedings. For instance, a judge who does not base his or her ruling on the evidence provided and the applicable laws but disregards a defendant while giving undue advantage to the prosecutor or the litigant commits judicial impropriety (Leyland & Anthony,

149-150). When the inmate failed to deliver on the guards' demands, the guards then planted drugs in the inmate's bunk (p. 150). The inmate was subsequently prosecuted, and received an extended sentence (p. 150). Often people will doubt these kinds of stories, because, after all, the inmates are already imprisoned for offenses like drugs, and often much worse kinds of crimes. This puts the inmates at risk of guards and

Social control can be maintained through proper guidelines and laws. If there will come a time that the multicultural society of Australia may be in need of change, there is always a room for social construction and re-construction as this is always part of the country's initiatives to develop and grow as a country for the people and by the people. Conclusion It appears that the Australian government is currently having an

It is however as if the United States government was looking for needy terrorists to supply with arms. When Turkey's need was met, Colombia became the leading recipient of arms from the United States. This country is well-known for being an atrocious human rights violator, especially during the 1990s. Chomsky's premise that the United States government is essentially terrorist in nature does not appear to be far from realistic. Indeed,

Ethics is an essential part of the individual condition. As an important person who starts up a large business as well as deals on a daily basis with other corporation at all arena of expansion so basically business ethics is lively and glowing plus hotly chat about in boardrooms all over the world. Furthermore for the majority of administration and boards know their accountability goes well beyond periodical results.