Cecil C. Humphreys School of Law
The University of Memphis Cecil C. Humphreys School of Law is an American Bar Association accredited law school and is the only law school in Memphis, Tennessee; the school has been associated with the University of Memphis since the law school's formation in 1962. The school was named in honor of former University president Cecil Clarence Humphreys, it is referred to as U of M Law, Memphis Law, or Memphis Law School. According to Memphis Law's 2017 ABA-required disclosures, 71.7% of the Class of 2017 obtained full-time, long-term, bar passage-required employment nine months after graduation, excluding solo practitioners. The law school was founded in 1962 as the Memphis State University College of Law, it gained ABA accreditation three years in 1965. Former Memphis businessman Herbert Herff was a major benefactor to the University of Memphis; when he died in 1966, Herff left the bulk of his estate in trust with the State of Tennessee for the benefit of the University. Among his Foundation's funding is the Herbert Herff Presidential Law Scholarships and the Herbert Herff Chair of Excellence in Law.
Prior to the law school's founding, there were several other law schools in Memphis, including Memphis Law School, Southern Law School, both of which subsequently merged with Memphis State University Law School. Memphis Law School existed as early as 1922 as the University of Memphis School of Law. Despite the names, neither Southern Law University nor the early University of Memphis School of Law had university connections, but rather offered part-time legal education programs, though both were approved by the State Board of Law Examiners; the law school joined the Association of American Law Schools in 2001. Reflecting the law school's increased profile, the Tennessee Supreme Court convened at the University of Memphis School of Law on November 4, 2010. In September 2012, the law school celebrated its semicentennial; the law school has graduated more than 5,000 students since its inception, it has 314 students and twenty-six full-time professors. It is named a “best value” in legal education by National Jurist Magazine.
Additionally, it has a high law school job placement rate with 88% of graduates being employed within nine months of graduation. In the winter 2018 issue of preLaw, the University of Memphis Law School received an A- grade in "Best Value Law Schools" list.. PreLaw has recently included Memphis Law in their 2018 "Health Law Honor Roll." Memphis Law has been recognized by the National Jurist and preLaw magazine as having the "Best Law School Facilities in the Nation" in 2014, more was named by the same publications as having the "Best Law School Building in the Nation." Many students participate on moot court or mock trial teams or are involved with the school's law journal, the University of Memphis Law Review. Additionally, the school's Moot Court/Mock Trial program has a long history of fielding successful teams, from ABA National Appellate Advocacy Competition teams to specialized teams such as our Duberstein Bankruptcy Section team, our ABA Mediation Team, several more. Additionally, the law school has an exceptionally strong Experiential Learning Program, with real-world opportunities for learning and success through our externship program or variety of Legal Clinics, such as our first-of-its-kind blight-fighting Neighborhood Preservation Clinic or our regionally-unique Medical-Legal Partnership Clinic with Le Bonheur Children's Hospital and Memphis Area Legal Services.
The University of Memphis School of Law is the most diverse law school in Tennessee and in the five-state Mid-South region. Because of inadequate, old facilities, former Dean James Smoot positioned the law school for a move from its building on the University's main campus in East Memphis to a former customs house on the Mississippi River in downtown Memphis; the new law school campus is more than twice the size of the old campus. Until purchased by the law school, a portion of the building had been serving as a post office. Designed by Memphis firms Askew Nixon Ferguson Architects and Fleming Associates Architects, the new law school is located in the heart of Memphis' downtown. Tennessee's governor, Phil Bredesen, has lent his support and pledged forty-one million dollars in state funds for the move. Along with the purpose-specific interior redesign, the architect oversaw structural renovations, including a $2 million seismic retrofit; the move was announced on January 12, 2006, it was anticipated that the downtown facility would be ready for classes January 2010.
As of Fall 2010, the new downtown campus is operational, with a dedication ceremony held on January 16, 2010. The 169,000-square-foot building housed the late 19th century U. S. Customs House. Built in the early 1880s, the Italianate Revival-style building opened in 1885. Over the years, the building has served as Memphis' main customs house, federal court house, most as a U. S. post office. It was placed on the National Register of Historic Places in 1980. Among features preserved in the restoration are the old federal courtroom, which now serves as one of the law school's moot courtrooms. During the restoration, a number of architectural details were rediscovered, including a decorative ceiling and roof monitor; the South Wing of the law school serves as the Plough Law Library. The law library contains more than 250,000 volumes of books and other legal materials. In addition, two of the building
Workers' compensation is a form of insurance providing wage replacement and medical benefits to employees injured in the course of employment in exchange for mandatory relinquishment of the employee's right to sue their employer for the tort of negligence. The trade-off between assured, limited coverage and lack of recourse outside the worker compensation system is known as "the compensation bargain". One of the problems that the compensation bargain solved is the problem of employers becoming insolvent as a result of high damage awards; the system of collective liability was created to prevent that, thus to ensure security of compensation to the workers. Individual immunity is the necessary corollary to collective liability. While plans differ among jurisdictions, provision can be made for weekly payments in place of wages, compensation for economic loss, reimbursement or payment of medical and like expenses, benefits payable to the dependents of workers killed during employment. General damage for pain and suffering, punitive damages for employer negligence, are not available in workers' compensation plans, negligence is not an issue in the case.
These laws were first enacted in Europe and Oceania, with the United States following shortly thereafter. Laws regarding workers compensation vary by country, but the Workers’ Accident Insurance system put into place by Otto von Bismarck in 1881 is cited as a model for Europe and the United States. Workers' compensation statutes are intended to eliminate the need for litigation and the limitations of common law remedies by having employees give up the potential for pain- and suffering-related awards, in exchange for not being required to prove tort on the part of their employer; the laws provide employees with monetary awards to cover loss of wages directly related to the accident as well as to compensate for permanent physical impairments and medical expenses. The laws provide benefits for dependents of those workers who are killed in work-related accidents or illnesses; some laws protect employers and fellow workers by limiting the amount an injured employee can recover from an employer and by eliminating the liability of co-workers in most accidents.
US state statutes establish this framework for most employment. US federal statutes are limited to federal employees or to workers employed in some significant aspect of interstate commerce; the exclusive remedy provision states that workers compensation is the sole remedy available to injured workers, thus preventing employees from making tort liability claims against their employers. In common law nations, the system was motivated by an "unholy trinity" of tort defenses available to employers, including contributory negligence, assumption of risk, the fellow servant rule. Common law imposes obligations on employers to provide a safe workplace, provide safe tools, give warnings of dangers, provide adequate co-worker assistance so that the worker is not overburdened, promulgate and enforce safe work rules. Claims under the common law for worker injury are limited by three defenses afforded employers: The Fellow Servant Doctrine is that employer can be held harmless to the extent that injury was caused in whole or in part by a peer of the injured worker.
Contributory negligence allows an employer to be held harmless to the extent that the injured employee failed to use adequate precautions required by ordinary prudence. Assumption of risk allows an employer to be held harmless to the extent the injured employee voluntarily accepted the risks associated with the work; as Australia experienced a influential labour movement in the late 19th and early 20th century, statutory compensation was implemented early in Australia. Each territory has its own governing body. A typical example is Work Safe Victoria, its responsibilities include helping employees avoid workplace injuries occurring, enforcement of Victoria's occupational and safety laws, provision of reasonably priced workplace injury insurance for employers, assisting injured workers back into the workforce, managing the workers' compensation scheme by ensuring the prompt delivery of appropriate services and adopting prudent financial practices. Compensation law in New South Wales has been overhauled by the state government.
In a push to speed up the process of claims and to reduce the amount of claims, a threshold of 11% WPI was implemented. Workers' compensation regulators for each of the states and territories are as follows: Australian Capital Territory – Work Safe Act New South Wales – State Insurance Regulatory Authority Northern Territory – NT Work Safe Queensland – The Workers' Compensation Regulator South Australia – ReturnToWork SA Tasmania – WorkCover Tasmania Victoria – WorkSafe Victoria Western Australia – WorkCover WAEvery employer must comply with the state, territory or commonwealth legislation, as listed below, which applies to them: Federal legislation - Safety and Compensation Act 1988 New South Wales - Workers Compensation Act 1987 and the Workplace Injury Management and Workers Compensation Act 1998 Northern Territory - Work Health and Safety Regulations Australian Capital Territory - Workers Compensation Act 1951 Queensland - Workers Compensation and Rehabilitation Act 2003 South Australia - Workers Rehabilitation and Compensation Act 1986 Tasmania - Workers Rehabilitation and Compensation Act 1988 Victoria - Workplace Injury
Informed consent is a process for getting permission before conducting a healthcare intervention on a person, or for disclosing personal information. A health care provider may ask a patient to consent to receive therapy before providing it, or a clinical researcher may ask a research participant before enrolling that person into a clinical trial. Informed consent is collected according to guidelines from the fields of medical ethics and research ethics. An informed consent can be said to have been given based upon a clear appreciation and understanding of the facts and consequences of an action. Adequate informed consent is rooted in respecting a person’s dignity. To give informed consent, the individual concerned must have adequate reasoning faculties and be in possession of all relevant facts. Impairments to reasoning and judgment that may prevent informed consent include basic intellectual or emotional immaturity, high levels of stress such as posttraumatic stress disorder or a severe intellectual disability, severe mental disorder, severe sleep deprivation, Alzheimer's disease, or being in a coma.
Obtaining informed consent is not always required. If an individual is considered unable to give informed consent, another person is authorized to give consent on his behalf, e.g. parents or legal guardians of a child and conservators for the mentally disordered, or consent can be assumed through the doctrine of implied consent, e.g. when an unconscious person will die without immediate medical treatment. In cases where an individual is provided insufficient information to form a reasoned decision, serious ethical issues arise; such cases in a clinical trial in medical research are anticipated and prevented by an ethics committee or Institutional Review Board. Informed Consent Form Templates can be found on the World Health Organization Website for practical use. Informed consent can be complex to evaluate, because neither expressions of consent, nor expressions of understanding of implications mean that full adult consent was in fact given, nor that full comprehension of relevant issues is internally digested.
Consent may be implied within the usual subtleties of human communication, rather than explicitly negotiated verbally or in writing. In some cases consent cannot be possible if the person protests he does indeed understand and wish. There are structured instruments for evaluating capacity to give informed consent, although no ideal instrument presently exists. Thus, there is always a degree to which informed consent must be assumed or inferred based upon observation, or knowledge, or legal reliance; this is the case in sexual or relational issues. In medical or formal circumstances, explicit agreement by means of signature—normally relied on legally—regardless of actual consent, is the norm; this is the case with certain procedures, such as a "do not resuscitate" directive that a patient signed before onset of their illness. Brief examples of each of the above: A person may verbally agree to something from fear, perceived social pressure, or psychological difficulty in asserting true feelings.
The person requesting the action may be unaware of this and believe the consent is genuine, rely on it. Consent is expressed, but not internally given. A person may claim to understand the implications of some action, as part of consent, but in fact has failed to appreciate the possible consequences and may deny the validity of the consent for this reason. Understanding needed for informed consent is, in fact, not present. A person signs a legal release form for a medical procedure, feels he did not consent. Unless he can show actual misinformation, the release is persuasive or conclusive in law, in that the clinician may rely upon it for consent. In formal circumstances, a written consent legally overrides denial of informed consent. Informed consent in the U. S. can be overridden in emergency medical situations pursuant to 21CFR50.24, first brought to the general public's attention via the controversy surrounding the study of Polyheme. For an individual to give valid informed consent, three components must be present: disclosure and voluntariness.
Disclosure requires the researcher to supply each prospective subject with the information necessary to make an autonomous decision and to ensure that the subject adequate understands the information provided. This latter requirement implies that a written consent form be written in lay language suited for the comprehension skills of subject population, as well as assessing the level of understanding through conversation. Capacity pertains to the ability of the subject to both understand the information provided and form a reasonable judgment based on the potential consequences of his/her decision. Voluntariness refers to the subject’s right to exercise his/her decision making without being subjected to external pressure such as coercion, manipulation, or undue influence. Waiver of the consent requirement may be applied in certain circumstances where no foreseeable harm is expected to result from the study or when permitted by law, federal regulations, or if an ethical review committee has approved the non-disclosure of certain information.
Besides studies with minimal risk, waivers of consent may be obtained in a military setting. According to 10 USC 980, the United States Code for the Armed Forces, Limitations on the Use of Humans as Experimental Subjects, a waiver of advanced informed consent may be granted by the Secretary of Defense if a research project would: Directly benefit subjects. Advance the de
Case law is a set of past rulings by tribunals that meet their respective jurisdictions' rules to be cited as precedent. These interpretations are distinguished from statutory law, which are the statutes and codes enacted by legislative bodies, regulatory law, which are regulations established by executive agencies based on statutes; the term "case law" is applied to any set of previous rulings by an adjudicatory tribunal that guides future rulings. In common law countries the term is used for judicial decisions of selected appellate courts, courts of first instance, agency tribunals, other bodies discharging adjudicatory functions. In common law countries, "case law" is a near-exact synonym for "common law". In the common law tradition, courts decide the law applicable to a case by interpreting statutes and applying precedents which record how and why prior cases have been decided. Unlike most civil law systems, common law systems follow the doctrine of stare decisis, by which most courts are bound by their own previous decisions in similar cases, all lower courts should make decisions consistent with previous decisions of higher courts.
For example, in England, the High Court and the Court of Appeal are each bound by their own previous decisions, but the Supreme Court of the United Kingdom is able to deviate from its earlier decisions, although in practice it does so. Speaking, higher courts do not have direct oversight over the lower courts of record, in that they cannot reach out on their own initiative at any time to overrule judgments of the lower courts; the burden rests with litigants to appeal rulings to the higher courts. If a judge acts against precedent and the case is not appealed, the decision will stand. A lower court may not rule against a binding precedent if it feels that it is unjust. If the court believes that developments or trends in legal reasoning render the precedent unhelpful, wishes to evade it and help the law evolve, it may either hold that the precedent is inconsistent with subsequent authority, or that it should be distinguished by some material difference between the facts of the cases. If that judgment goes to appeal, the appellate court will have the opportunity to review both the precedent and the case under appeal overruling the previous case law by setting a new precedent of higher authority.
This may happen several times. Lord Denning, first of the High Court of Justice of the Court of Appeal, provided a famous example of this evolutionary process in his development of the concept of estoppel starting in the High Trees case: Central London Property Trust Ltd v. High Trees House Ltd K. B. 130. The different roles of case law in civil and common law traditions create differences in the way that courts render decisions. Common law courts explain in detail the legal rationale behind their decisions, with citations of both legislation and previous relevant judgments, an exegesis of the wider legal principles; the necessary analysis constitutes a precedent binding on other courts. By contrast, decisions in civil law jurisdictions are very short, referring only to statutes; the reason for this difference is that these civil law jurisdictions adhere to a tradition that the reader should be able to deduce the logic from the decision and the statutes, so that, in some cases, it is somewhat difficult to apply previous decisions to the facts presented in future cases.
Some pluralist systems, such as Scots law in Scotland and so-called civil law jurisdictions in Quebec and Louisiana, do not fit into the dual "common-civil" law system classifications. Such systems may have been influenced by the Anglo-American common law tradition; because of their position between the two main systems of law, these types of legal systems are sometimes referred to as "mixed" systems of law. Law professors in common law traditions play a much smaller role in developing case law than professors in civil law traditions; because court decisions in civil law traditions are brief and not amenable to establishing precedent, much of the exposition of the law in civil law traditions is done by academics rather than by judges. Common law courts relied little on legal scholarship. Today academic writers are cited in legal argument and decisions as persuasive authority, thus common law systems are adopting one of the approaches long common in civil law jurisdictions. Judges may refer to various types of persuasive authority to reach a decision in a case.
Cited non-binding sources include legal encyclopedias such as Corpus Juris Secundum and Halsbury's Laws of England, or the published work of the Law Commission or the American Law Institute. Some bodies are given statu
In law, common law is that body of law derived from judicial decisions of courts and similar tribunals. The defining characteristic of "common law" is. In cases where the parties disagree on what the law is, a common law court looks to past precedential decisions of relevant courts, synthesizes the principles of those past cases as applicable to the current facts. If a similar dispute has been resolved in the past, the court is bound to follow the reasoning used in the prior decision. If, the court finds that the current dispute is fundamentally distinct from all previous cases, legislative statutes are either silent or ambiguous on the question, judges have the authority and duty to resolve the issue; the court states an opinion that gives reasons for the decision, those reasons agglomerate with past decisions as precedent to bind future judges and litigants. Common law, as the body of law made by judges, stands in contrast to and on equal footing with statutes which are adopted through the legislative process, regulations which are promulgated by the executive branch.
Stare decisis, the principle that cases should be decided according to consistent principled rules so that similar facts will yield similar results, lies at the heart of all common law systems. The common law—so named because it was "common" to all the king's courts across England—originated in the practices of the courts of the English kings in the centuries following the Norman Conquest in 1066; the British Empire spread the English legal system to its historical colonies, many of which retain the common law system today. These "common law systems" are legal systems that give great precedential weight to common law, to the style of reasoning inherited from the English legal system. Today, one-third of the world's population lives in common law jurisdictions or in systems mixed with civil law, including Antigua and Barbuda, Bahamas, Barbados, Botswana, Cameroon, Cyprus, Fiji, Grenada, Hong Kong, Ireland, Jamaica, Liberia, Malta, Marshall Islands, Namibia, New Zealand, Pakistan, Papua New Guinea, Sierra Leone, South Africa, Sri Lanka and Tobago, the United Kingdom, the United States, Zimbabwe.
Some of these countries have variants on common law systems. The term common law has many connotations; the first three set out here are the most-common usages within the legal community. Other connotations from past centuries are sometimes seen and are sometimes heard in everyday speech; the first definition of "common law" given in Black's Law Dictionary, 10th edition, 2014, is "The body of law derived from judicial decisions, rather than from statutes or constitutions. This usage is given as the first definition in modern legal dictionaries, is characterized as the “most common” usage among legal professionals, is the usage seen in decisions of courts. In this connotation, "common law" distinguishes the authority. For example, the law in most Anglo-American jurisdictions includes "statutory law" enacted by a legislature, "regulatory law" or “delegated legislation” promulgated by executive branch agencies pursuant to delegation of rule-making authority from the legislature, common law or "case law", i.e. decisions issued by courts.
This first connotation can be further differentiated into pure common law arising from the traditional and inherent authority of courts to define what the law is in the absence of an underlying statute or regulation. Examples include most criminal law and procedural law before the 20th century, today, most contract law and the law of torts. Interstitial common law court decisions that analyze and determine the fine boundaries and distinctions in law promulgated by other bodies; this body of common law, sometimes called "interstitial common law", includes judicial interpretation of the Constitution, of legislative statutes, of agency regulations, the application of law to specific facts. Publication of decisions, indexing, is essential to the development of common law, thus governments and private publishers publish law reports. While all decisions in common law jurisdictions are precedent, some become "leading cases" or "landmark decisions" that are cited often. Black's Law Dictionary 10th Ed. definition 2, differentiates "common law" jurisdictions and legal systems from "civil law" or "code" jurisdictions.
Common law systems place great weight on court decisions, which are considered "law" with the same force of law as statutes—for nearly a millennium, common law courts have had the authority to make law where no legislative statute exists, statutes mean what courts interpret them to mean. By contrast, in civil law jurisdictions, courts lack authority to act. Civil law judges tend to give less weight to judicial precedent, which means that a
Family and Medical Leave Act of 1993
The Family and Medical Leave Act of 1993 is a United States labor law requiring covered employers to provide employees with job-protected and unpaid leave for qualified medical and family reasons. These include pregnancy, foster care placement of a child, personal or family illness, or family military leave; the FMLA is administered by Hour Division of the United States Department of Labor. The FMLA was intended "to balance the demands of the workplace with the needs of families." The Act allows eligible employees to take up to 12 work weeks of unpaid leave during any 12-month period to attend to the serious health condition of the employee, spouse or child, or for pregnancy or care of a newborn child, or for adoption or foster care of a child. In order to be eligible for FMLA leave, an employee must have been at the business at least 12 months, worked at least 1,250 hours over the past 12 months, work at a location where the company employs 50 or more employees within 75 miles; the FMLA covers both public- and private-sector employees, but certain categories of employees are excluded, including elected officials and their personal staff members.
The bill was a major part of President Bill Clinton's agenda in his first term. Rapid growth in the workforce, including a large number of women joining, suggested a necessary federal regulation that would support the working class who desired to raise a family and/or required time off for illness related situations. President Clinton signed the bill into law on February 5, 1993 to take effect on August 5, 1993; the United States Congress passed the Act with the understanding that “it is important for the development of children and the family unit that fathers and mothers be able to participate in early childrearing … the lack of employment policies to accommodate working parents can force individuals to choose between job security and parenting”. It stressed the Act was intended to provide leave protection for individuals “in a manner that accommodates the legitimate interests of employers”; the Family and Medical Leave Act of 1993 applies to employers of 50 or more employees in 20 weeks of the last year.
Employees must have worked over 1250 hours in the last year. However, employees "at which such employer employs less than 50 employees if the total number of employees employed by that employer within 75 miles of that worksite is less than 50." A worksite includes a public agency, including schools and state and federal employers. The 50 employee threshold does not apply to local educational agencies. There are special hours rules for certain airline employees. Employees must give notice of 30 days to employers if birth or adoption is "foreseeable", for serious health conditions if practicable. Treatments should be arranged "so as not to disrupt unduly the operations of the employer" according to medical advice. Along with the 30 day notice, there are other requirements to be made when seeking the FMLA rights. If an employee wants to leave the first time using ones FMLA rights, the person must first claim the Family and Medical Leave Act. In the case that an employee were to leave again under the FMLA act, the same process must proceed.
With the release of employees, there is a certification as well. The absence of an employee due to the conditions he or she may have may require a certification as proof of the verification of absence. In order to certify the leave of an employee, the employer may ask for other requirements. An example of these requirements are requiring multiple medical opinions. All of these prerequisites are at the employer's expense. There are certain rules that may apply to those who work at local education agencies. Employees can have up to 12 weeks of unpaid leave for child birth, adoption, to care for a close relative in poor health, or because of an employee's own poor health. In full, the purposes for leave are: to care for a new child, whether for the birth, the adoption, or placement of a child in foster care. Twenty-six workweeks of leave during a single 12-month period to care for a covered servicemember with a serious injury or illness if the eligible employee is the servicemember’s spouse, daughter, parent, or next of kin.
Child care leave should be taken in one lump. If a father and mother have the same employer, they must share their leave, in effect halving each person's rights, if the employer so chooses. Employers must provide benefits during the unpaid leave. Under §2652 states are empowered to provide "greater family or medical leave rights". Since 2008, the US Department of Labor, allowed the spouse, child, or parent of an active duty military member, deployed across seas for 12 or more months to take up to 12 weeks of leave. A military caregiver provision was added that would allow a caregiver to take up to 26 weeks of leave in order to care for a military member who requires medical attention for acute or ongoing conditions. Under §2612 an employer can make an employee substitute the right to 12 unpaid weeks of leave for "accrued paid vacation l
Criminal law is the body of law that relates to crime. It proscribes conduct perceived as threatening, harmful, or otherwise endangering to the property, health and moral welfare of people inclusive of one's self. Most criminal law is established by statute, to say that the laws are enacted by a legislature. Criminal law includes the rehabilitation of people who violate such laws. Criminal law varies according to jurisdiction, differs from civil law, where emphasis is more on dispute resolution and victim compensation, rather than on punishment or rehabilitation. Criminal procedure is a formalized official activity that authenticates the fact of commission of a crime and authorizes punitive or rehabilitative treatment of the offender; the first civilizations did not distinguish between civil law and criminal law. The first written codes of law were designed by the Sumerians. Around 2100–2050 BC Ur-Nammu, the Neo-Sumerian king of Ur, enacted the oldest written legal code whose text has been discovered: the Code of Ur-Nammu although an earlier code of Urukagina of Lagash is known to have existed.
Another important early code was the Code of Hammurabi. Only fragments of the early criminal laws of Ancient Greece have survived, e.g. those of Solon and Draco. In Roman law, Gaius's Commentaries on the Twelve Tables conflated the civil and criminal aspects, treating theft as a tort. Assault and violent robbery were analogized to trespass as to property. Breach of such laws created an obligation of law or vinculum juris discharged by payment of monetary compensation or damages; the criminal law of imperial Rome is collected in Books 47–48 of the Digest. After the revival of Roman law in the 12th century, sixth-century Roman classifications and jurisprudence provided the foundations of the distinction between criminal and civil law in European law from until the present time; the first signs of the modern distinction between crimes and civil matters emerged during the Norman Invasion of England. The special notion of criminal penalty, at least concerning Europe, arose in Spanish Late Scholasticism, when the theological notion of God's penalty, inflicted for a guilty mind, became transfused into canon law first and to secular criminal law.
The development of the state dispensing justice in a court emerged in the eighteenth century when European countries began maintaining police services. From this point, criminal law formalized the mechanisms for enforcement, which allowed for its development as a discernible entity. Criminal law is distinctive for the uniquely serious, potential consequences or sanctions for failure to abide by its rules; every crime is composed of criminal elements. Capital punishment may be imposed in some jurisdictions for the most serious crimes. Physical or corporal punishment may be imposed such as whipping or caning, although these punishments are prohibited in much of the world. Individuals may be incarcerated in prison or jail in a variety of conditions depending on the jurisdiction. Confinement may be solitary. Length of incarceration may vary from a day to life. Government supervision may be imposed, including house arrest, convicts may be required to conform to particularized guidelines as part of a parole or probation regimen.
Fines may be imposed, seizing money or property from a person convicted of a crime. Five objectives are accepted for enforcement of the criminal law by punishments: retribution, incapacitation and restoration. Jurisdictions differ on the value to be placed on each. Retribution – Criminals ought to Be Punished in some way; this is the most seen goal. Criminals have taken improper advantage, or inflicted unfair detriment, upon others and the criminal law will put criminals at some unpleasant disadvantage to "balance the scales." People submit to the law to receive the right not to be murdered and if people contravene these laws, they surrender the rights granted to them by the law. Thus, one who murders may be executed himself. A related theory includes the idea of "righting the balance." Deterrence – Individual deterrence is aimed toward the specific offender. The aim is to impose a sufficient penalty to discourage the offender from criminal behavior. General deterrence aims at society at large. By imposing a penalty on those who commit offenses, other individuals are discouraged from committing those offenses.
Incapacitation – Designed to keep criminals away from society so that the public is protected from their misconduct. This is achieved through prison sentences today; the death penalty or banishment have served the same purpose. Rehabilitation – Aims at transforming an offender into a valuable member of society, its primary goal is to prevent further offense by convincing the offender that their conduct was wrong. Restoration – This is a victim-oriented theory of punishment; the goal is to repair, through state authority, any injury inflicted upon the victim by the offender. For example, one who embezzles will be required to repay the amount improperly acquired. Restoration is combined with other main goals of criminal justice and is related to concepts in the civil law, i.e. returning the victim to his or her original position before the injury. Many laws are enforced by threat of criminal punishment, the range of the punishment varies with the jurisdiction; the scope of criminal law is too vast to catalog intelligently.
The following are some of the more typical aspects of criminal law. The criminal law prohibits undesirable acts. Thus, proof of a crime requires proof of some act. Scholars label this the requir