Case BriefCrim law: the actus reus requirement1/26/15Identity of CaseRobinson v. California, 370 U.S. 660 (1962)Page 181 of the casebookSummary of Facts, Procedural HistoryRobinson is arrested and convicted under California statute that makes it “illegal to be addicted to the use of narcotics.” He claims he wasn’t addicted, that the track marks were for something else…appeals on the constitutionality of the crime and the sufficiency of the evidence. SCOTUS overturns conviction, tells California to get rid of that law. Statement of the IssueCan a person be arrested and convicted for being addicted to the use of narcotics? HoldingNo, because being addicted is a status, not a criminal act. ReasoningAddiction is a physical condition that occurs after the prolonged use of drugs. It does not, however, meanthat the addict is currently using drugs, or even that they have recently used drugs. Where is the bad act? Dissent: argues that the law is meant to apply to people who use daily (but there doesn’t seem to be evidence of that in the statute). Also argues that this is meant to serve deterrence purposes: but a law isn’t ok because it has a purpose, it is ok because it follows the rules set out in the constitution.
View Full Document
Unlocking...