Justia Legal Guides: Criminal Law Center

Facing a criminal charge is daunting, but defendants have important rights to protect. The Criminal Law Center at Justia explains the elements of many crimes and a variety of potential defense strategies.

Approximate Read Time: 4 Minutes

One of the most famous trials in American history concluded in October nearly three decades ago. This involved football player O.J. Simpson, who won the Heisman Trophy at USC before launching a prolific NFL career. On a summer night in 1994, Simpson’s ex-wife and a friend were murdered outside her Los Angeles condominium. Suspicion quickly settled on Simpson, who had a history of domestic violence during the period surrounding his divorce. He was charged with murder and pleaded not guilty.

The trial began in the following January, attracting attention across America. Its most dramatic moment arrived in June when Simpson was asked to try on a pair of gloves in the courtroom. One of the gloves had been found at the murder scene, and the other allegedly had been found by a police detective at his home. As Simpson held up his hands toward the jury, the gloves appeared to be clearly too small. Johnnie Cochran, who led his “Dream Team” of defense attorneys, coined a now-famous line: “If it doesn’t fit, you must acquit.” It didn’t, and they did.

On October 3, 1995, Simpson was found not guilty of murder. However, this was not quite the end of the story. Simpson next faced a civil lawsuit under a wrongful death theory. A jury found him liable in early 1997, and he was ordered to pay over $30 million in damages. (Plaintiffs in civil lawsuits face a much lower standard of proof than prosecutors in criminal cases, so the outcome of a prosecution does not dictate the outcome of a lawsuit based on the same events.)

Someone exploring this chapter of American legal history might want to know more about what the prosecution needs to prove in a murder case, or how a defendant can beat the charge. The Criminal Law Center in the Justia Legal Guides describes the various forms of homicide, as well as some of the defenses that may be raised in these cases.

Types of Homicide Charges

People sometimes use “homicide” and “murder” interchangeably. However, homicide refers to any situation in which a person kills someone else, while murder is the most serious form of homicide. This requires the prosecution to prove that the killing was intentional. Many states divide murder further into first-degree murder and second-degree murder. First-degree murder generally requires proof that the defendant acted with premeditation, while second-degree murder requires proof of intent but not premeditation. It also may be charged in circumstances involving extremely reckless conduct that shows an indifference to human life.

In limited situations, an intentional killing may lead to a charge of voluntary manslaughter rather than murder. This tends to involve an extraordinary provocation that understandably caused the defendant to lose control of their emotions and kill someone in the “heat of passion.” A key issue in many of these cases is whether the defendant committed the homicide immediately after the provocation. If some time separated the provocation from the crime, they may be more likely to be charged with murder because they should have been able to “cool down” during that time.

Unintentional homicide may lead to an involuntary manslaughter charge. This means that the defendant caused a death because they were reckless or criminally negligent. While these terms have different meanings in different states, recklessness usually means that the defendant was aware that they were causing an unreasonable risk. Criminal negligence usually means that they were not aware of a risk that they were causing, but they should have been aware of it. When a death results from reckless or negligent driving, a defendant may be charged with a specific crime called vehicular homicide (or vehicular manslaughter) rather than involuntary manslaughter.

Defenses to Homicide

A defendant charged with homicide may argue that the prosecution does not have enough evidence to prove the crime beyond a reasonable doubt. In other cases, a defendant may argue that they lacked the required mental state, such as intent in a murder prosecution. In still other cases, a defendant may argue that law enforcement violated their constitutional rights. For example, the police might have gotten an incriminating statement without providing the Miranda warnings required by the Fifth Amendment. These include the right to remain silent and the right to an attorney, who will be a public defender if a suspect cannot afford a private attorney. Or the police might have violated search and seizure rules under the Fourth Amendment when collecting evidence.

Another common argument is self-defense, which essentially means that the defendant used deadly force due to a reasonable fear of imminent harm. The force must be proportionate to the threat for a self-defense theory to defeat a homicide charge. If a defendant had an unreasonable fear or used unreasonable force, they still may benefit from a theory called imperfect self-defense. Although this will not result in an acquittal, imperfect self-defense may help a defendant get a reduction in their charge and penalties.

Meanwhile, the insanity defense has arisen in some famous homicide cases, such as the attempted assassination of President Ronald Reagan. States define this defense in varying ways. The most traditional version of the insanity defense, known as the M’Naghten Rule, asks whether the defendant was unable to understand what they were doing or distinguish right from wrong. The insanity defense should not be confused with competence to stand trial. If a defendant is not mentally competent, the proceedings cannot move forward until they become competent, but this is not a defense to the underlying charge.

Final Thoughts

Anyone who is facing a homicide charge, or who is under suspicion of homicide, should immediately consult a criminal lawyer who is experienced in handling these high-stakes cases. Prompt intervention can make a huge difference to the outcome. On the other hand, the Criminal Law Center provides a reference for people interested in learning about the basics of the law, or perhaps improving their understanding of events in the news. Like the other Justia Legal Guides, it aims to make the law transparent and accessible to all.

• Justia Free Resources: The Justia U.S. Supreme Court Center
• Featured Justia Resources: Drunk Driving (DUI/DWI) Center
• Justia Legal Guides: Traffic Tickets Center

Lee este artículo en Español en Justia Avanza.