FEDERAL CRIMINAL CODE REFORM - FROM THE NATIONAL COMMISSION TO S 1437

• NCJ Number: 53892
• Journal: CRIMINAL LAW REPORTER Volume: 22 Issue: 23 Dated: (MARCH 15, 1978) Pages: 1,3-15,SUPPLEMENT
• Author(s): J G MILES; R L GOEBES
• Date Published: 1978
• Length: 15 pages
• Corporate Author: Bureau of National Affairs
• Sale Source: National Institute of Justice/
• Language: English
• Country: United States of America
• Note: A BUREAU OF NATIONAL AFFAIRS SPECIAL ANALYSIS ON CRIMINAL CODE REFORM

Annotation

THIS ANLYSIS OF ATTEMPTS TO REFORM THE FEDERAL CRIMINAL CODE TRACES THE HISTORY OF THIS MOVEMENT, ANALYZES THE OBJECTIONS PUT FORTH TO SENATE BILL 1 (S.1), AND GIVES THE MAJOR PROVISIONS OF SENATE BILL 1438 (S. 1438).

Abstract

THE MAJOR PROBLEMS SURROUNDING ATTEMPTS TO MODERNIZE AND CONSOLIDATE THE FEDERAL CRIMINAL CODE HAVE CENTERED ON CIVIL RIGHTS AND CIVIL LIBERTIES ISSUES. MORE THAN 30 YEARS AGO THE AMERICAN LAW INSTITUTE BEGAN TO DRAFT A MODERN CRIMINAL CODE WHICH COULD SERVE AS A MODEL FOR STATE LEGISLATURES. THIS EVENTUALLY LED, IN 1966, TO THE NATIONAL COMMISSION FOR REFORM OF FEDERAL CRIMINAL LAWS. THE COMMISSION'S RECOMMENDATIONS LED TO THE INTRODUCTION OF S. 1 AND A COMPANION BILL S. 1400 IN 1973. THE COMMISSION'S PROPOSAL WAS AIMED AT A COMPREHENSIVE, LOGICALLY ORGANIZED, AND INTERNALLY CONSISTENT CRIMINAL CODE. CLARITY WAS ENHANCED BY DEFINING CRIMES IN TERMS OF CONDUCT AND CULPABILITY, WITHOUT REGARD TO FACTORS GIVING THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT PROSECUTORIAL JURISDICTION. JURISDICTIONAL BASES WERE CATALOGUED IN A SEPARATE SECTION. THESE RECOMMENDATIONS ARE BRIEFLY REVIEWED. THOSE WHO DRAFTED S. 1 HAD A DIFFERENT PHILOSOPHY FROM THE COMMISSION AND AS A RESULT PENALTIES WERE MUCH MORE SEVERE IN THE PROPOSED LAW. THIS BILL WAS ALSO SEEN AS MAKING MANY INROADS INTO FIRST AMENDMENT FREEDOMS, PARTICULARLY THE CHAPTER DEALING WITH ESPIONAGE AND RELATED ACTIVITIES. THIS CONTROVERSY IS ANALYZED IN DETAIL. THE RESULT OF THIS SEVERE CRITICISM WAS A REWRITTEN BILL, S. 1438. THE DIFFERENCES BETWEEN S. 1 AND S. 1438 ARE DISCUSSED, INCLUDING CHANGES IN THE ESPIONAGE PROVISIONS, THE TREATMENT OF OBSCENITY, CHARGES OF LEADING A RIOT, PROTECTION FROM MISDEMEANOR LIABILITY WHEN DEMONSTRATING TO INFLUENCE JUDICIAL PROCEEDINGS, PROTECTION AGAINST PROSECUTION FOR FALSE STATEMENTS MADE IN IGNORANCE, ALLOWABLE DEFENSES, DRUG SENTENCES, AND PROVISIONS FOR A SENTENCING COMMISSION. THE ARTICLE IS HEAVILY FOOTNOTED. (GLR)