CHAPTER OBJECTIVES - part. CHAPTER I Introduction  CHAPTER OBJECT...

© 2015 Cengage Learning. All rights reserved. May not be scanned, copied or duplicated, or posted to a publicly accessible website, in whole or in part.

CHAPTER I

Introduction

 CHAPTER OBJECTIVES

• Understand each of five jurisprudential approaches to answering the question, What

is law?

• Explain the legal objectives that are common to American public and private law.
• Understand how our nation’s legal history and culture have contributed to law and legal

institutions as we know them today.

• Develop the ability to read and brief an appellate court opinion.
• Explain in general terms the concepts underlying the Due Process and Equal

Protection Clauses.

• Understand the basic differences between civil and criminal law.
• Understand the basic differences between tort and contract law.

 SUMMARY OVERVIEW

Chapter I began by raising a fundamental jurisprudential question, What is law? Many students who have not previously thought much about law are surprised to learn that there is no single universally accepted answer to the question and that the likely best answer is, It depends. After reading brief synopses of several differing philosophical schools, it becomes apparent why developing a consensus definition has proven to be so difficult. What followed next were a discussion of legal objectives that are common to both private and public law in this country, and a review of Anglo-American historical and cultural heritage with a focus on how these have contributed to law as we know it today. Because students using this textbook need immediately to begin developing the ability to read excerpts from judicial opinions, the chapter included a highly simplified overview of civil procedure. This overview was necessary preparation for students about to read their first case. Civil procedure is a topic that is covered in considerably more detail in Chapter V. The chapter continued with some additional comments on reading cases immediately prior to the first judicial opinion, Miller v. Alabama. An analysis of that case followed, along with a sample brief, both of which were intended to further help students learn how to read and understand judicial opinions in general, and the first case in particular. The chapter then turned to an overview of constitutional due process and equal protection, and a discussion of the differences between civil and criminal law. The chapter concluded with an explanation of the differences between tort and contract law.(Introduction to Law and the Legal System 11e Frank August Schubert) (Instructor Manual all Chapters) 1 / 4

2 Chapter I: Introduction

© 2015 Cengage Learning. All rights reserved. May not be scanned, copied or duplicated, or posted to a publicly accessible website, in whole or in part.

 CHAPTER OUTLINE

I. WHAT IS LAW?

• Law as Power
• Natural Law
• Historical Jurisprudence
• Utilitarian Law
• Analytical Positivism

II. SOCIOLOGICAL JURISPRUDENCE, LEGAL REALISM, AND LEGAL SOCIOLOGY

• Sociological Jurisprudence
• Legal Realists
• Legal Sociologists

III. OBJECTIVES OF LAW

• Continuity and Stability
• Adaptability
• Justice, Speed, and Economy
• Determining Desirable Public Policy

IV. ORIGIN OF LAW IN THE UNITED STATES

• The Origins of English Common Law
• The Norman Invasion
• The Development of the Common Law
• The Origin of the English Equitable Court

V. A PROCEDURAL PRIMER

VI. READING CASES — PART I

• Author’s Introduction to Evan Miller v. Alabama and Kuntrell Jackson v. Ray

Hobbs, Director, Arkansas Department of Correction

• Nomenclature Tips
• A Short Excerpt from Justice Breyer’s Concurring Opinion, Which Also Was

Joined by Justice Sotomayor

• “I Respectfully Dissent”
• A Short Excerpt from Chief Justice Roberts’s Dissent
• A Short Excerpt from Justice Thomas’s Dissent
• A Short Excerpt from Justice Alito’s Dissent 2 / 4

Chapter I: Introduction 3

© 2015 Cengage Learning. All rights reserved. May not be scanned, copied or duplicated, or posted to a publicly accessible website, in whole or in part.

VII. CASE QUESTIONS

VIII. READING CASES — PART II

IX. BRIEFING A CASE

• Sample Brief

X. DUE PROCESS

• The Fifth and Fourteenth Amendments
• The Meaning of Substantive Due Process
• Substantive Due Process and Economic and Social Regulation
• The Scope of Substantive Due Process
• Glucksberg Postscript

XI. VAGUENESS AND OVERBREADTH

• Procedural Due Process
• Introduction to Melinda Speelman v. Bellingham Housing Authority

XII. CRIMINAL AND CIVIL LAW

XIII. EQUAL PROTECTION OF THE LAW

XIV. TORT AND CONTRACT LAW

• Torts
• Contracts

XV. CHAPTER SUMMARY

XVI. CHAPTER QUESTIONS

XVII. NOTES 3 / 4

4 Chapter I: Introduction

© 2015 Cengage Learning. All rights reserved. May not be scanned, copied or duplicated, or posted to a publicly accessible website, in whole or in part.

 COURT CASES

Summary Miller v. Alabama

_____ U. S. _____

Supreme Court of the United States June 25, 2012

In these two consolidated cases, two juveniles, one from Alabama (Evan Miller) and the other from Arkansas (Kuntrell Jackson), were prosecuted, convicted, and sentenced in adult courts for capital murder. One of the cases involved 14-year old Kuntrell Jackson and two other boys who robbed a video store and in the process the store clerk was killed. Jackson was not armed, did not fire the fatal shot and in fact waited outside during most of the robbery. In the other case, Evan Miller was also 14 years old at the time of his crime. Miller had a troubled past that included both substance abuse and an abusive stepparent. He and a friend attempted to steal money from an acquaintance that had passed out after consuming marijuana and alcohol. The victim revived while the theft was in progress and Miller thereafter struck him repeatedly with a baseball bat. The boys then set fire to the victim’s residence and the victim ultimately died from injuries and smoke inhalation. Miller was tried and convicted as an adult. Jackson and Miller were both tried as adults and were both convicted of murder. Both were sentenced to life imprisonment without the possibility of parole. In neither case did the sentencing authority have any discretion under applicable state law to impose a different punishment. Both sought review of their conviction arguing that a mandatory sentence of life without parole for a 14-year-old violates the Eighth Amendment’s ban on cruel and unusual punishment.In a 5–4 decision, the court reversed the lower court decisions in both cases. In so doing, the court first pointed out that the cruel and unusual punishment concept must properly be viewed through a historical prism according to “the evolving standards of decency that mark the progress of a maturing society.” The court looked to its earlier precedents of Roper and Graham as establishing that children are constitutionally different from adults for purposes of sentencing because they lack maturity, are more vulnerable to negative influences and outside pressure, and have traits that are less fixed. Thus, they have diminished culpability and greater prospects for reform.The mandatory penalty schemes at issue in these cases prevent the sentencer from taking account these important considerations. By removing consideration of youth and subjecting a juvenile to the same life-without-parole sentence applicable to an adult, these laws prohibit a sentencing authority from assessing whether the law’s harshest term of imprisonment proportionately punishes a juvenile offender. The court felt that this contravenes Graham’s (and also Roper’s) foundational principle: that the imposition by a state of its most severe penalty on juvenile offenders cannot proceed as though they were not children.Case Questions and Answers

• According to the majority, exactly what legal principle was violated by the

mandatory nature of these sentences?The legal principle violated by the mandatory nature of these sentences was the principle of proportionality.

• / 4