Remote Harms and Non-constitutive Crimes

Simester, A. P.; Hirsch, Andrew von

doi:10.1080/07311290902831441

Cited by 15 publications

(10 citation statements)

References 2 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…However, in terms of liberal 63 Simester and von Hirsch (2009), 99, also citing Duff (2005a, 64. 64 Simester and von Hirsch (2009), 101-102.…”

Section: Possession As a Form Of Endangermentmentioning

confidence: 95%

“…47 I leave out of account here the problem of D's liability for doing an act that foreseeably encourages another to commit an offence: see the discussion of Glanville Williams' views by Baker (2007), 383-386, andalso in Baker (2009), 179-181. 48 Simester and von Hirsch (2009), at 99. 49 Dubber (2001), at 864, 896.…”

Section: Possession As a Form Of Endangermentmentioning

confidence: 96%

“…13 Stuntz (2001), 538. 14 For earlier discussions, see Dubber (2001), pp. 915-918;Husak (1995) and (2004), Simester and von Hirsch (2009), Baker (2007 In Robinson v. California (1962) 370 U.S. 660 the U.S. Supreme Court held that it was unconstitutional to criminalize addiction, that being a mere state of affairs.…”

Section: Possession Offences and Core Doctrinesmentioning

confidence: 98%

“…3 Husak (1995). 4 Simester and von Hirsch (2009). They use the term 'non-constitutive' to refer to offences in which 'the ultimate harm that justifies such crimes is remote from the crime itself; 'constitutive crimes' are those where the very harm that justifies criminalization is part of the definition of the crime (e.g.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

The Unfairness of Risk-Based Possession Offences

Ashworth

2011

Criminal Law, Philosophy

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This is a study of possession offences, with the focus on those intended to penalise the risk of a serious harm. Offences of this kind are examined in the light of basic doctrines of the criminal law, and in the light of the proper limits of endangerment offences. They are found wanting in both respects, and are also found to pose particular sentencing problems. The conclusion is that many risk-based possession offences are unfair, save those that require proof of a further intent or those aimed at a failure properly to safeguard a dangerous object.Keywords Possession offences Á Firearms Á Act requirement Á Culpability requirement Á Offences of omission Á Principles of imputation Á Abstract endangerment PreliminariesIt is a commonplace that in recent years the criminal justice system has come to put increasing emphasis on risk rather than on simply responding to past events: in policing, in pre-trial procedures, in the criminal law, in sentencing, in release procedures and in postrelease supervision, we increasingly see risk-reduction and public safety being referred to as priorities. 1 In this article I want to engage with one small pocket of that movement-that constituted by risk-based offences of possession-and to examine its implications for criminal law doctrine.

show abstract

“…However, in terms of liberal 63 Simester and von Hirsch (2009), 99, also citing Duff (2005a, 64. 64 Simester and von Hirsch (2009), 101-102.…”

Section: Possession As a Form Of Endangermentmentioning

confidence: 95%

Section: Possession As a Form Of Endangermentmentioning

confidence: 96%

Section: Possession Offences and Core Doctrinesmentioning

confidence: 98%

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

The Unfairness of Risk-Based Possession Offences

Ashworth

2011

Criminal Law, Philosophy

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Teoría unitaria personal.En la obra de Hassemer y Muñoz Conde se defiende una concepción unitaria del bien jurídico centrada en la persona. Para los autores, quienes consideran que la lesión o puesta en peligro de un bien jurídico corresponde a un elemento central en la determinación del merecimiento de pena,122 una prohibición o mandato penal se justifica únicamente cuando protege un interés calificable como bien jurídico penal 123. Dichos bienes, a su vez, son producto del acuerdo social basado en evidencia, de forma tal que el legislador "no los saca de la realidad social", sino que los configura mediante una función política y un proceso constitutivo.…”

unclassified

Sobre la evolución del bien jurídico penal: un intento de saltar más allá de la propia sombra

Vargas

León²

2012

Polít. crim.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

SZCZARANSKI, Federico. "Sobre la evolución del bien jurídico penal: un intento de saltar más allá de la propia sombra". ResumenEl autor recorre la historia y evolución del concepto del bien jurídico, analizando la relación entre aquel y la pregunta por la legitimidad de las normas penales. Así, se repasan los inicios del concepto en el trabajo de Birnbaum y se exponen las principales corrientes dogmáticas relativas al contenido del bien jurídico. En consecuencia, se explican tanto las distintas teorías que se pueden identificar con una visión crítica o material del bien jurídico, en la que la protección de éstos se constituye en requisito de legitimidad; como aquellas en las que dicho concepto se identifica con la ratio legis y según las cuales la función del derecho penal se encuentra en reafirmar la vigencia de la norma infringida.Luego de analizar las teorías que recurren a nuevos criterios y principios de legitimación que buscan complementar el rol del bien jurídico, se concluye intentando hacer patente el dilema que enfrenta la teoría del bien jurídico: sin contenido independiente del legislador no puede limitarlo, pero con contenido independiente se constituye en una barrera contramayoritaria que afecta principios democráticos. Palabras claveBien jurídico, legitimidad, límites, legislador, principios AbstractThe author reviews the history and evolution of the legal good, analyzing its relationship with inquiry regarding the legitimacy of penal norms. The origins of the concept in Birnbaum's work are thus reviewed and the main dogmatic positions regarding the legal good's content are explained. Consequently, both the diverse theories related to a critical or material vision of the legal good -where the legal goods' protection is a condition of legitimacy-as well the theories in which said concept is identified with the ratio legis and according to which the function of Penal law is to reaffirm the validity of the infringed norm.After analyzing the theories that use new criteria and principles of legitimacy that seek to complement the role of the legal good, the article concludes attempting to show the SZCZARANSKI, Federico. "Sobre la evolución del bien jurídico penal: un intento de saltar más allá de la propia sombra". 379 dilemma facing the legal good theory: without independent content provided by the legislator it cannot be limited, but with independent content it rises as a countermajoritarian barrier that affects democratic principles.

show abstract

Terrorizing Criminal Law

Zedner

2012

Criminal Law, Philosophy

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Remote Harms and Non-constitutive Crimes

Cited by 15 publications

References 2 publications

The Unfairness of Risk-Based Possession Offences

The Unfairness of Risk-Based Possession Offences

Sobre la evolución del bien jurídico penal: un intento de saltar más allá de la propia sombra

Terrorizing Criminal Law

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About