Sign Up Now
Get instant access to over 1 million+ study documents
OR
Already registered? click here to login
By creating your account, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and student honor code.
While Louie, Billy, and Smokey can all be charged with federal crimes in relation to the bank robbery, Billy can also be charged with the murdered of his estranged wife. In the case of his murdered wife, the state would be responsible for pressing charges for that crime because the murder was completely separate from the bank robbery. Just because it happened on the same day as the robbery, there is no connection between the two crimes.
When Louie and Billy were arrested at the home of Smokey, the fact that they had the stolen money, and probably left behind evidence at the crime scene, it would be difficult to plan an effective defense against the bank robbery charges. When the two innocent people were killed during that robbery, the law is clear that any deaths occurring committed during the commission of a crime, are considered as murder and eligible for the death penalty. Even if Billy was not present during the death of the bank teller, and Louie was not driving the car,...
It is also the case that the accidental death of the police office can be charged against both Billy and Louie since his death occurred as a direct result of their criminal activity.
If there is anyone who may be able to plan an effective defense it is Smokey. He can separate himself from the actions of the others by claiming that he did not know the source of the money. While he may be found guilty of money laundering, if the others only planned to launder money with Smokey, and did not mention anything about where the money came from, then he may not be liable for the crimes committed during the bank robbery. And since he had no plans to give aid to the criminals after fleeing the robbery, he can claim that after the robbery went bad, the others commandeered his home against his will.
So while Vinnie is dead and cannot be charged with any crime, both Billy and Louie can be charged with bank robbery, murder, burglary, and theft in connection to the bank robbery. Billy can also be charged with the murder of his wife, but probably by the state. And as for Smokey, he can definitely be charged with conspiracy to commit money laundering, but may be able to distance himself from a connection to the bank robbery and events afterward.
References
Abrams, Norman. (1989). "The New Ancillary Offenses." Criminal Law Forum. 1(1), 1-
39. Print.
Carper, Donald, John McKinsey, Bill West. (2011). "Understanding the Law." Mason:
Ohio. South-Western. Retrieved from http://books.google.com/books?id=x0IcppkdabEC&pg=PA230&dq=parties+to+a+crime&hl=en&ei=4SKBTpXkAarm0QGrm-Fy&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=4&ved=0CEQQ6AEwAw%20//%20v=onepage&q=parties%20to%20a%20crime&f=false
Criminal Law Every country regardless of its size and location has some form of criminal law existing. This law helps the country define punishable offenses and includes country's stand of such concepts as self-defense, necessity, insanity, negligence, and complicity. Criminal law is clearly written law in other words, it is a codified law. In the United States this codified law is known as the Model Penal Code which has helped in
Criminal Law Title and Citation The type of case that was selected is Fisher v. Texas. ("Fisher v. Texas") (Wermeil) Type of Action It is an affirmative action case that originated in U.S. federal court and was decided at the U.S. Supreme Court in 2013. Currently, the U.S. Fifth Circuit of Appeals is addressing the issues presented by the Supreme Court. As compensation, the plaintiffs are seeking out: monetary damages, a change in the
In the spying story, the FCNL position is that spying on American citizens (tapping phones) without a warrant is illegal. The FCNL article gives visitors to the site the data on which Senators and members of the House voted for and against legislation referring to warrantless wiretapping. "Senate condones warrantless spying program," the headline reads, and the story outlines the 68-29 Senate vote that basically grants "blanket immunity to
Criminal Law Edwards v. South Carolina, 372 U.S. 229 (1963) Facts: Edwards v. South Carolina is based upon an event that occurred on March 2, 1961. This is when 187 people peacefully marched upon the state capital of South Carolina to voice their problems with the inequalities facing African-Americans. After being ordered to disperse, they were arrested under the charge breach of the peace. They sued the state (in 1961) claiming that
Criminal Law The Elsa Daniels Case Should Elsa be exonerated due to her intent to return the money and her good motive? Intent to Return: In criminal law, a person cannot be exonerated of embezzlement, even if the embezzler intended to return the property later. Only in case of larceny, the law in several U.S. states allows the taking of another's property without permission and then returning it within a reasonable time. In
criminal law. A comprehensive research, primary and secondary, was conducted in order to gather relevant information about crime, criminal law and crimes against a person. This study can help understanding the mechanism that deals with the criminal law. Crime is an integral part of the everyday life and is a salient fact in today's world. In the opinion of public as well as the scholars, crime is usually linked with