IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/ucp/scerev/doi10.1086-692926.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Explaining the Standard of Proof in Criminal Law: A New Insight

Author

Listed:
  • Nuno Garoupa

Abstract

Legal economists have explained the standard of proof in criminal law by exploring the asymmetry between social costs of false negatives (acquitting guilty defendants) and false positives (convicting innocent defendants). In a recent article, a model of punitive preferences (individuals with stronger-than-average punishment preferences) was introduced to explain police behavior, law enforcement, and rules of criminal procedure. We extend that model to provide for a new explanation for a more demanding standard of proof in criminal law without relying on exogenous assumptions about the social cost of false negatives and false positives.

Suggested Citation

  • Nuno Garoupa, 2017. "Explaining the Standard of Proof in Criminal Law: A New Insight," Supreme Court Economic Review, University of Chicago Press, vol. 25(1), pages 111-122.
    • Handle: RePEc:ucp:scerev:doi:10.1086/692926
    DOI: 10.1086/692926
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.1086/692926
    Download Restriction: Access to the online full text or PDF requires a subscription.
    File URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.1086/692926
    Download Restriction: Access to the online full text or PDF requires a subscription.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1086/692926?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Murat C. Mungan & Marie Obidzinski & Yves Oytana, 2020. "Accuracy and Preferences for Legal Error," Working Papers 2020-09, CRESE.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:ucp:scerev:doi:10.1086/692926. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Journals Division (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.journals.uchicago.edu/SCER .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.