Model Penal Code

Last updated

The Model Penal Code (MPC) is a model act designed to stimulate and assist U.S. state legislatures to update and standardize the penal law of the United States. [1] [2] The MPC was a project of the American Law Institute (ALI), and was published in 1962 after a ten-year drafting period. [3] The chief reporter on the project was Herbert Wechsler, and contributors included Sanford Kadish and numerous other noted criminal law scholars, prosecutors, and defense lawyers. [4] [5] [3]

Contents

The ALI performed an examination of the penal system in the U.S. and the prohibitions, sanctions, excuses, and authority used throughout in order to arrive at a cohesive synthesis to the extent possible, [5] and the best rules for the penal system in the United States. [5] Primary responsibility for criminal law lies with the individual states, which over the years led to great inconsistency among the various state penal codes. [4] The MPC was meant to be a comprehensive criminal code that would allow for similar laws to be passed in different jurisdictions. [2]

The MPC itself is not legally-binding law, but since its publication in 1962 approximately 34 U.S. states and the District of Columbia have enacted criminal codes that borrow heavily from it. [3] It has greatly influenced criminal courts even in states that have not directly drawn from it, and judges increasingly use the MPC as a source of the doctrines and principles underlying criminal liability. [3]

History

The Model Penal Code (MPC) was developed by the American Law Institute (ALI) as a comprehensive framework to guide state legislatures in modernizing and standardizing criminal laws across the United States. Its creation was driven by the need to address inconsistencies in state criminal codes and to reflect evolving societal norms and advancements in legal theory.

Early Development

The origins of the MPC date back to 1951, when the ALI resolved to undertake the ambitious project. The drafting process was led by Herbert Wechsler, a prominent legal scholar and then-Director of the ALI. The initial drafts of the MPC were created with the input of leading jurists, scholars, and practitioners, incorporating a broad range of perspectives on criminal justice reform. [6]

Publication and Adoption

The final draft of the MPC was completed in 1962. Although it does not carry the force of law, the MPC has been highly influential in shaping state criminal codes. Many states adopted substantial portions of the MPC into their statutory law, particularly in areas such as mens rea (mental state), sentencing guidelines, and the categorization of offenses. [7]

Key Revisions

The MPC has undergone revisions to address new challenges and reflect shifts in public policy. Notable updates include the development of sentencing reforms in the 1980s and adjustments to provisions on sexual offenses in response to changing societal attitudes. The ALI continues to review and revise sections of the MPC as part of its mission to keep the code relevant and effective. [8]

Modern Impacts

The MPC’s influence extends beyond U.S. jurisdictions. Internationally, the code has served as a model for law reform efforts, showcasing a rational and principled approach to codifying criminal law. Despite its age, the MPC remains a cornerstone of American legal scholarship and a benchmark for evaluating legislative proposals. [9]

Legacy

Today, the MPC continues to shape legal education and policy debates, with its provisions frequently cited in court decisions and legal literature. Its emphasis on clarity, consistency, and fairness ensures its enduring relevance in the field of criminal law. [10]

Key features

Element analysis

Under the MPC, crimes are defined in terms of a set of "elements of the offense," each of which must be proven to the finder of fact beyond a reasonable doubt. There are three types of elements:

  1. conduct of a certain nature,
  2. attendant circumstances at the time of the conduct, or
  3. the result of that conduct.

The elements are those facts that:

  1. are included in the definition of forbidden conduct as provided by the statute, or
  2. establish the required culpability, or
  3. negate an excuse or justification for such conduct, or
  4. negate a defense under the statute of limitation, or
  5. establish jurisdiction or venue.

All but the last two categories are material elements, and the prosecution must prove that the defendant had the required kind of culpability with respect to that element.

Mens rea or culpability

One of the major innovations of the MPC is its use of standardized mens rea terms (criminal mind, or in MPC terms, culpability) to determine levels of mental states, just as homicide is considered more severe if done intentionally rather than accidentally. These terms are (in descending order) "purposely", "knowingly," "recklessly", and "negligently", with a fifth state of "strict liability", which is highly disfavored. Each material element of every crime has an associated culpability state that the prosecution must prove beyond a reasonable doubt.

If an offense requires a specific kind of culpability, then any more severe culpability will suffice. Thus if an offense is defined in the form, "It is illegal to knowingly do X," then it is illegal to do X knowingly or purposely (a more severe state), but not to do so recklessly or negligently (the two less severe states). Strict liability means that it is illegal to do something, regardless of one's mental state. If a statute provides only a single kind of culpability for a crime, that kind of culpability is assumed to apply to all elements. If no culpability is stated by statute, a minimum of recklessness is assumed to be required. The MPC declines to use the common terms "intentional" or "willful" in its specification of crimes, in part because of the complex interpretive history of these terms. [11] However, it defines that any (non-MPC) statute in the jurisdiction's criminal code that uses the term "intentionally" shall mean "purposely," and any use of "willfully" shall mean "with knowledge." If a law makes an actor absolutely liable for an offense, MPC sections 2.05 and 1.04 state that the actor can only be guilty of what the MPC calls violations (essentially meaning civil infractions), which only carry fines or other monetary penalties, and no jail time.

Unlawful acts explicitly set forth

Another important feature is that under the MPC, any action not explicitly outlawed is legal. This concept follows the saying, "That which is not forbidden is allowed" as opposed to "That which is not allowed is forbidden." Legal scholars contrast the MPC's limits with laws passed by Nazi Germany and the Soviet Union, which allowed people to be punished for acts not specifically outlawed but similar to acts that were. The MPC provision has a prospective effect in that it applies to those acts which may be committed in the future. This is not the same as a retrospective effect of past acts which are protected by the rule against ex post facto laws.

Under the MPC, ignorance of criminal law is not considered a valid defense, unless the legislature intended on making the mistake of law a defense, the law is unknown to the actor and had not been published, or the actor is acting as a result of some official statement about the law. See sections 2.02(9) and 2.04.

Options for enacting jurisdictions

Certain parts of the MPC contain multiple options, inviting states to choose one. A particularly controversial topic was the proper place of the death penalty in the MPC. However, the MPC explicitly states that the "[American Law] Institute took no position on the desirability of the death penalty." Note that no state is obliged to adopt any specific part of the MPC; see below.

Enactments

As of May 20, 2023, 44 U.S. states, the District of Columbia and the U.S. federal government have decriminalized fornication, aligning with or adopting less restrictive policies than those recommended by the MPC under § 213.2, which advises against criminalizing consensual sexual conduct between adults, emphasizing the protection of individual privacy and autonomy. [12]

As of June 16, 2023, 24 U.S. states and the District of Columbia have aligned with the MPC recommendation under § 213.3 to classify bestiality as a misdemeanor for a first-time offense. [13]

As of July 18, 2023, 48 U.S. states, the District of Columbia and the U.S. federal government have repealed their anti-cohabitation laws, aligning with the MPC recommendation under § 213.2 to decriminalize consensual adult cohabitation. [14]

As of October 1, 2023, 38 U.S. states and the District of Columbia have repealed their sodomy laws, aligning with the MPC recommendation under § 213.2 to decriminalize consensual adult sexual conduct. [15]

As of September 1, 2024, 19 U.S. states and the District of Columbia have fully aligned with the MPC guidance under § 221.1, which advocates for the decriminalization of possession of small amounts of drugs for personal use, focusing on treatment and rehabilitation rather than punitive measures, while maintaining penalties for large-scale trafficking and distribution. [16]

As of November 22, 2024, 34 U.S. states and the District of Columbia have repealed their adultery laws, aligning with the MPC recommendation under § 213.6 to decriminalize adultery. [17]

As of December 5, 2024, 30 U.S. states, the District of Columbia and the U.S. federal government permit abortions under circumstances that include threats to the woman’s physical or mental health, the likelihood of the fetus being born with a grave physical or mental defect, or pregnancies resulting from rape or incest, aligning with or having less restrictive policies than those outlined in the MPC under § 230.3, which permits abortion under these conditions when performed by a licensed physician. [18] From January 22, 1973 to June 24, 2022, 44 U.S. states, the District of Columbia, and the federal government permitted abortion under conditions similar to those outlined in the MPC § 230.3, including cases involving threats to the woman's physical or mental health, fetal abnormalities, and pregnancies resulting from rape or incest, in alignment with the framework established by Roe v. Wade and Planned Parenthood v. Casey . [19]

As of January 1, 2025, all 50 U.S. states, the District of Columbia and the U.S. federal government have incorporated elements of the MPC approach under § 251.4, which narrows the definition of obscenity to material that appeals to prurient interests, is patently offensive, and lacks serious literary, artistic, political, or scientific value, reflecting the principles established in Miller v. California . [20]

As of March 20, 2025, 5 U.S. states and the District of Columbia have fully aligned with the MPC guidance under § 250.11, which addresses hate crimes by enhancing penalties for offenses motivated by bias against race, color, religion, national origin, ethnicity, gender, sexual orientation, gender identity, disability, or age, while ensuring procedural safeguards to prevent abuse of such enhancements. [21]

Criticism

Advocates of the MPC stress that the law must be clearly defined to prevent arbitrary enforcement, or a chilling effect on a population that does not know what actions are punishable. This is known as the legality principle. [22] However, critics say that the assumption that there are no possible legal systems between the extremes of "forbidden" and "allowed" is the central weakness of the MPC. British law, for example, assumes that a jury can decide what is "reasonable" both in the context of British law and social expectations as well as the specific accusation they are being asked to judge. Behavior may thus be deemed unlawful by a jury in cases where the MPC would require legislative change to produce a conviction. [23]

Use

The MPC is not law in any jurisdiction of the United States; however, it served and continues to serve as a basis for the replacement of existing criminal codes in over two-thirds of the states. [24] Many states adopted portions of the MPC, but only states such as New Jersey, New York, and Oregon have enacted almost all of the provisions. [25] Idaho adopted the model penal code in its entirety in 1971, but the legislature repealed this action two months after it came into effect in 1972. [26]

The repeal of the MPC in Idaho came about after intense rejection of the new codification due to the lack of laws regulating morality, areas of the MPC that affected important political groups in the state, and also prosecutors and police who were critical of some areas of the new MPC-based code. The state bar association, judiciary committees in the legislature, and the Supreme Court of Idaho defended the new MPC-based code. Chiefs in the objections were the omission of sodomy, adultery and fornication as crimes. [27]

On rare occasions, the courts will turn to the MPC for its commentary on the law and use it to seek guidance in interpreting non-code criminal statutes. It is also used frequently as a tool for comparison.

Section 230.3 Abortion (Tentative draft 1959, Official draft 1962) of the MPC was used as a model for abortion law reform legislation enacted in 13 states from 1967 to 1972. It is included as Appendix B of Justice Blackmun's opinion in the January 22, 1973 Doe v. Bolton decision of the United States Supreme Court ( Roe v. Wade's lesser-known companion case). It would legalize abortion to preserve the health (whether physical or mental) of the mother, as well as if the pregnancy is due to incest or rape, or if doctors agree that there is a significant risk that the child will be born with a serious mental or physical defect.

In October 2009, the ALI voted to disavow the framework for capital punishment that it had included in the MPC, "in light of the current intractable institutional and structural obstacles to ensuring a minimally adequate system for administering capital punishment." A study commissioned by the institute had said that experience had proved that the goal of individualized decisions about who should be executed and the goal of systemic fairness for minorities and others could not be reconciled. [28]

See also

Notes

  1. ↑ Kadish (1978)
  2. 1 2 MPC (Foreword).
  3. 1 2 3 4 Kadish, Schulhofer & Barkow (2017), p. 157.
  4. 1 2 Wechsler (1952)
  5. 1 2 3 Dubber (2015, pp. 7-10).
  6. ↑ "About the Model Penal Code." American Law Institute. Accessed December 12, 2024.
  7. ↑ Robinson, Paul H. "The Influence of the Model Penal Code on American Criminal Law." *University of Pennsylvania Law Review*, vol. 90, no. 2, 1997, pp. 545–580. DOI:10.2307/3318452.
  8. ↑ Reitz, Kevin. "Sentencing Reform and the Model Penal Code." *Crime and Justice*, vol. 30, 2003, pp. 203–254. DOI:10.1086/652217.
  9. ↑ Dubber, Markus D. "Model Penal Code: A Global Perspective." *Oxford Handbook of Criminal Law*, Oxford University Press, 2014, pp. 321–338.
  10. ↑ Wechsler, Herbert. "Codification and the Model Penal Code." *Harvard Law Review*, vol. 78, no. 8, 1965, pp. 1255–1276. DOI:10.2307/1339257.
  11. ↑ Kadish (1999, p. 952).
  12. ↑ Source: [MPC guidance on fornication](https://www.ali.org/publications/show/model-penal-code/?utm_source=chatgpt.com)
  13. ↑ Source: [MPC guidance on bestiality](https://www.ali.org/publications/show/model-penal-code/?utm_source=chatgpt.com)
  14. ↑ Source: [MPC guidance on cohabitation](https://www.ali.org/publications/show/model-penal-code/?utm_source=chatgpt.com)
  15. ↑ Source: [MPC guidance on sodomy](https://www.ali.org/publications/show/model-penal-code/?utm_source=chatgpt.com)
  16. ↑ Source: [MPC guidance on drug decriminalization](https://www.ali.org/publications/show/model-penal-code/?utm_source=chatgpt.com)
  17. ↑ Source: [MPC guidance on adultery](https://www.ali.org/publications/show/model-penal-code/?utm_source=chatgpt.com)
  18. ↑ Source: [MPC guidance on abortion](https://www.ali.org/publications/show/model-penal-code/?utm_source=chatgpt.com)
  19. ↑ "Abortion Laws in the United States".
  20. ↑ Source: [MPC guidance on obscenity](https://www.ali.org/publications/show/model-penal-code/?utm_source=chatgpt.com)
  21. ↑ Source: [MPC guidance on hate crimes](https://www.ali.org/publications/show/model-penal-code/?utm_source=chatgpt.com)
  22. ↑ Professor Paul H. Robinson, University of Pennsylvania, Criminal Law: Cases and Controversies, full discussion beginning on page 39 (2005).
  23. ↑ Wechsler (1952, pp. 1130-33).
  24. ↑ Robinson (2003, p. 24)
  25. ↑ "Criminal Law Basics". Mojo Law. Archived from the original on February 27, 2012. Retrieved 12 December 2010.
  26. ↑ Stone & Hall (1972)
  27. ↑ Eskridge, William N. Jr. (2008). Dishonorable Passions: Sodomy Laws in America. Penguin Group. ISBN   978-0-670-01862-8.
  28. ↑ Adam Liptak (January 4, 2010). "Group Gives Up Death Penalty Work". The New York Times. Archived from the original on August 1, 2022.

Related Research Articles

In criminal law, mens rea is the mental state of a defendant who is accused of committing a crime. In common law jurisdictions, most crimes require proof both of mens rea and actus reus before the defendant can be found guilty.

In criminal law, actus reus, Latin for "guilty act", is one of the elements normally required to prove commission of a crime in common law jurisdictions, the other being Latin: mens rea. In the United States, it is sometimes called the external element or the objective element of a crime.

An inchoate offense, preliminary crime, inchoate crime or incomplete crime is a crime of preparing for or seeking to commit another crime. The most common example of an inchoate offense is "attempt". "Inchoate offense" has been defined as the following: "Conduct deemed criminal without actual harm being done, provided that the harm that would have occurred is one the law tries to prevent."

In law, attendant circumstances are the facts surrounding an event.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">American Law Institute</span> American legal advocacy group

The American Law Institute (ALI) is a research and advocacy group of judges, lawyers, and legal scholars established in 1923 to promote the clarification and simplification of United States common law and its adaptation to changing social needs. Members of ALI include law professors, practicing attorneys, judges and other professionals in the legal industry. ALI writes documents known as "treatises", which are summaries of generally state court common law. Many courts and legislatures look to ALI's treatises as authoritative reference material concerning many legal issues. However, some legal experts and the late Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia, along with some conservative commentators, have voiced concern about ALI rewriting the law.

In criminal law, culpability, or being culpable, is a measure of the degree to which an agent, such as a person, can be held morally or legally responsible for action and inaction. It has been noted that the word, culpability, "ordinarily has normative force, for in nonlegal English, a person is culpable only if he is justly to blame for his conduct". The guilt principle requires that in order to convict a person it is necessary to ascertain his voluntary or reckless behaviour, Strict Liability being prohibited.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Abortion law</span> Laws that allow, prohibit, or regulate abortion

Abortion laws vary widely among countries and territories, and have changed over time. Such laws range from abortion being freely available on request, to regulation or restrictions of various kinds, to outright prohibition in all circumstances. Many countries and territories that allow abortion have gestational limits for the procedure depending on the reason; with the majority being up to 12 weeks for abortion on request, up to 24 weeks for rape, incest, or socioeconomic reasons, and more for fetal impairment or risk to the woman's health or life. As of 2022, countries that legally allow abortion on request or for socioeconomic reasons comprise about 60% of the world's population. In 2024, France became the first country to explicitly protect abortion rights in its constitution, while Yugoslavia implicitly inscribed abortion rights in its constitution in 1974.

Herbert Wechsler was an American legal scholar and former director of the American Law Institute (ALI). He is most widely known for his constitutional law scholarship and for the creation of the Model Penal Code. The Journal of Legal Studies has identified Wechsler as one of the most cited legal scholars of the 20th century.

An attempt to commit a crime occurs if a criminal has an intent to commit a crime and takes a substantial step toward completing the crime, but for reasons not intended by the criminal, the final resulting crime does not occur. Attempt to commit a particular crime is a crime, usually considered to be of the same or lesser gravity as the particular crime attempted. Attempt is a type of inchoate crime, a crime that is not fully developed. The crime of attempt has two elements, intent and some conduct toward completion of the crime.

Voluntary manslaughter is the killing of a human in which the offender acted in the heat of passion, a state that would cause a reasonable person to become emotionally or mentally disturbed to the point that they cannot reasonably control their emotions. Voluntary manslaughter is one of two main types of manslaughter, the other being involuntary manslaughter.

In criminal law, strict liability is liability for which mens rea does not have to be proven in relation to one or more elements comprising the actus reus although intention, recklessness or knowledge may be required in relation to other elements of the offense. The liability is said to be strict because defendants could be convicted even though they were genuinely ignorant of one or more factors that made their acts or omissions criminal. The defendants may therefore not be culpable in any real way, i.e. there is not even criminal negligence, the least blameworthy level of mens rea.

Deviant sexual intercourse or deviate sexual intercourse is, in some U.S. states, a legal term for "any act of sexual gratification involving the sex organs of one person and the mouth or anus of another, anus to mouth or involving invasion of the anus or vagina of one person by a foreign object manipulated by another person".

In most common law jurisdictions, an element of a crime is one of a set of facts that must all be proven to convict a defendant of a crime. Before a court finds a defendant guilty of a criminal offense, the prosecution must present evidence that, even when opposed by any evidence the defense may choose, is credible and sufficient to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that the defendant committed each element of the particular crime charged. The component parts that make up any particular crime vary now depending on the crime.

A terroristic threat is a threat to commit a crime of violence or a threat to cause bodily injury to another person and terrorization as the result of the proscribed conduct. Several U.S. states have enacted statutes which impose criminal liability for "terroristic threatening" or "making a terroristic threat."

In the United States, the law for murder varies by jurisdiction. In many US jurisdictions there is a hierarchy of acts, known collectively as homicide, of which first-degree murder and felony murder are the most serious, followed by second-degree murder and, in a few states, third-degree murder, which in other states is divided into voluntary manslaughter, and involuntary manslaughter such as reckless homicide and negligent homicide, which are the least serious, and ending finally in justifiable homicide, which is not a crime. However, because there are at least 52 relevant jurisdictions, each with its own criminal code, this is a considerable simplification.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Criminal law of the United States</span>

The criminal law of the United States is a manifold system of laws and practices that connects crimes and consequences. In comparison, civil law addresses non-criminal disputes. The system varies considerably by jurisdiction, but conforms to the US Constitution. Generally there are two systems of criminal law to which a person maybe subject; the most frequent is state criminal law, and the other is federal law.

Manslaughter is a crime in the United States. Definitions can vary among jurisdictions, but manslaughter is invariably the act of causing the death of another person in a manner less culpable than murder. Three types of unlawful killings constitute manslaughter. First, there is voluntary manslaughter which is an intentional homicide committed in "sudden heat of passion" as the result of adequate provocation. Second, there is the form of involuntary manslaughter which is an unintentional homicide that was committed in a criminally negligent manner. Finally, there is the form of involuntary manslaughter which is an unintentional homicide that occurred during the commission or attempted commission of an unlawful act which does not amount to a felony.

Sanford "Sandy" H. Kadish was an American criminal law scholar and theorist. He specialised in criminology and criminal law theory, and was one of the drafters of the American Model Penal Code.

Overcriminalization is the concept that criminalization has become excessive, meaning that an excessive number of laws and regulations deeming conduct illegal have a detrimental effect on society, particularly with respect to victimless crimes and actions which make conduct illegal without criminal intent on the part of the individual.

The Texas Penal Code is the principal criminal code of the U.S. state of Texas. It was originally enacted in 1856 and underwent substantial revision in 1973, with the passage of the Revised Penal Code, in large part based on the American Law Institute's Model Penal Code.

References

This page is based on this Wikipedia article
Text is available under the CC BY-SA 4.0 license; additional terms may apply.
Images, videos and audio are available under their respective licenses.