Advanced Search
MyIDEAS: Login to save this paper or follow this series

Can a Model Penal Code Second Save the States for Themselves?

Contents:

Author Info

  • Paul Robinson

    (University of Pennsylvania Law School)

Registered author(s):

    Abstract

    Other contributors to this Symposium suggest a variety of changes to the Model Penal Code that they think justify producing a Model Penal Code Second. We offer such suggestions elsewhere. We want to use this space to discuss a slightly different, but related, subject: the need for, and potential effect of, a Model Penal Code Second as a spur to reforming current American criminal codes.Probably the most important point we can contribute is to make clear that current American criminal codes are in serious trouble. About one-third of the states never adopted a modern criminal code during the codification wave of the 1960s and 70s. But even those that did adopt new codes have, over the past forty years, discovered many flaws in the drafting. Even among the well-drafted provisions, many are badly out-of-date. The sexual offenses are just at the top of a long list. Some states have amended those out-of-date provisions, and many other provisions as well. But as we will discuss, that amendment process creates its own problems--different problems, but nonetheless tragic and devastating ones.Indeed, this is the subject we want to take up here. Though the Model Penal Code has serious flaws that merit consideration and correction, our experience has led us to conclude that the greater problem for American criminal codes is the amendment process by the state legislatures and its cumulative effect over the past forty years.

    Download Info

    If you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.
    File URL: http://lsr.nellco.org/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1048&context=upenn/wps
    Download Restriction: no

    Bibliographic Info

    Paper provided by University of Pennsylvania Law School in its series Scholarship at Penn Law with number upenn_wps-1048.

    as in new window
    Length:
    Date of creation:
    Date of revision:
    Handle: RePEc:bep:upennl:upenn_wps-1048

    Contact details of provider:
    Web page: http://www.law.upenn.edu/

    Related research

    Keywords:

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    References

    No references listed on IDEAS
    You can help add them by filling out this form.

    Citations

    Lists

    This item is not listed on Wikipedia, on a reading list or among the top items on IDEAS.

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:bep:upennl:upenn_wps-1048. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Christopher F. Baum).

    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.

    If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.

    If the full references list an item that is present in RePEc, but the system did not link to it, you can help with 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 profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

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