Search

Elgar Advanced Introductions are stimulating and thoughtful introductions to major fields in the social sciences, business and law, expertly written by the world's leading scholars. Designed to be accessible yet rigorous, they offer concise and lucid surveys of the substantive and policy issues associated with discrete subject areas.This Advanced Introduction to Substantive Criminal Law explores the doctrines, issues and controversies in the substantive field of criminal law. Chapters cover important theoretical and doctrinal topics, including the justifications for state blame and punishment, the foundations for criminalization, the prima facie case, affirmative defences of justification and excuse, and sentencing. Stephen J. Morse uses copious concrete examples drawn from cases, statutes and extended case studies, including the intricate grading of homicide, to enliven the discussion.Key Features:Concise and accessible formatTheoretical explication of doctrinal intricaciesInformative coverage and real world examples of criminal lawDiscussion of the challenges and responsibilities surrounding legal concepts of the personProviding a compact and succinct introduction to the rich scholarship of the field, this Advanced Introduction will be an ideal read for lawyers and law students interested in criminal law and justice. It will also be a valuable resource for law enforcement personnel and anyone looking to understand the role of criminal law as a means to achieve justice and social safety.

This book presents a comprehensive overview of what the criminal law would look like if organised around the principle that those who deserve punishment should receive punishment commensurate with, but no greater than, that which they deserve. Larry Alexander and Kimberly Kessler Ferzan argue that desert is a function of the actor's culpability, and that culpability is a function of the risks of harm to protected interests that the actor believes he is imposing and his reasons for acting in the face of those risks. The authors deny that resultant harms, as well as unperceived risks, affect the actor's desert. They thus reject punishment for inadvertent negligence as well as for intentions or preparatory acts that are not risky. Alexander and Ferzan discuss the reasons for imposing risks that negate or mitigate culpability, the individuation of crimes, and omissions.