People v. Rizzo

Last updated
People v. Rizzo
Seal of the New York Court of Appeals.svg
Court New York Court of Appeals
Full case nameThe People of the State of New York, Respondent, v. Charles Rizzo, Appellant, Impleaded with Others.
DecidedNovember 22, 1927 (1927-11-22)
Citation(s)246 N.Y. 334; 158 N.E. 888
Case history
Appealed fromBronx County Court; Appellate Division of the New York Supreme Court
Court membership
Judges sitting Frederick E. Crane, Henry T. Kellogg, John F. O'Brien
Case opinions
MajorityCrane, joined by Kellogg, O'Brien

People v. Rizzo, Court of Appeals of New York, 246 N.Y. 334, 158 N.E. 888 (1927), is a criminal case that set precedent for what constitutes an attempt to commit a crime. [1]

Contents

Facts

Charles Rizzo, Anthony J. Dorio, Thomas Milo and John Thomasell planned to rob a courier carrying payroll. Rizzo told the others that he could identify the courier. They drove around looking for the courier but they failed to locate the courier before police stopped and arrested them.

Prior History

Charles Rizzo was convicted of attempted robbery in the first degree by the Bronx County Court on February 17, 1927. [2] He appealed to the Supreme Court of New York, Appellate Division which affirmed the conviction on June 27, 1927. [3]

Conclusion

Actions must be dangerously close to the commission of a crime to satisfy the action for an attempt. Having failed to find his target, Rizzo could not have completed a substantial step toward commission of robbery to be found guilty of attempting robbery.

Related Research Articles

Life imprisonment is any sentence of imprisonment for a crime under which convicted people are to remain in prison for however long they have lived or indefinitely until pardoned, paroled, or otherwise commuted to a fixed term. Crimes for which, in some countries, a person could receive this sentence include murder, torture, terrorism, child abuse resulting in death, rape, espionage, treason, drug trafficking, drug possession, human trafficking, severe fraud and financial crimes, aggravated criminal damage, arson, kidnapping, burglary, and robbery, piracy, aircraft hijacking, and genocide, crimes against humanity, war crimes, severe cases of child pornography, or any three felonies in case of three-strikes law. Life imprisonment can also be imposed, in certain countries, for traffic offences causing death. Life imprisonment is not used in all countries; Portugal was the first country to abolish life imprisonment, in 1884.

Larceny is a crime involving the unlawful taking or theft of the personal property of another person or business. It was an offence under the common law of England and became an offence in jurisdictions which incorporated the common law of England into their own law, where in many cases it remains in force.

Miranda v. Arizona, 384 U.S. 436 (1966), was a landmark decision of the U.S. Supreme Court in which the Court ruled that the Fifth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution restricts prosecutors from using a person's statements made in response to interrogation in police custody as evidence at their trial unless they can show that the person was informed of the right to consult with an attorney before and during questioning, and of the right against self-incrimination before police questioning, and that the defendant not only understood these rights but also voluntarily waived them.

Actus reus, sometimes called the external element or the objective element of a crime, is the Latin term for the "guilty act", which, when proving it before the court beyond a reasonable doubt in combination with the mens rea, "guilty mind", produces criminal liability in the common law-based criminal law jurisdictions of England and Wales, Canada, Australia, India, Kenya, Pakistan, South Africa, New Zealand, Scotland, Nigeria, Ghana, Ireland, Israel and the United States. In the United States, some crimes also require proof of an attendant circumstance.

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."

<span class="mw-page-title-main">United States District Court for the Southern District of New York</span> United States federal district court

The United States District Court for the Southern District of New York is a federal trial court whose geographic jurisdiction encompasses eight counties of New York State. Two of these are in New York City: New York (Manhattan) and Bronx; six are in the Hudson Valley: Westchester, Putnam, Rockland, Orange, Dutchess, and Sullivan. Appeals from the Southern District of New York are taken to the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit.

Attempted murder is a crime of attempt in various jurisdictions.

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.

Criminal jurisdiction is a term used in constitutional law and public law to describe the power of courts to hear a case brought by a state accusing a defendant of the commission of a crime. It is relevant in three distinct situations:

  1. to regulate the relationship between states, or between one state and another;
  2. where the nation is a federation, to regulate the relationship between the federal courts and the domestic courts of those states comprising the federation; and
  3. where a state only has, to a greater or lesser extent, a single and unified system of law, it is the law of criminal procedure to regulate what cases each classification of court within the judicial system shall adjudicate upon. People must be tried in the same state the crime is committed.

People v. Goetz, 68 N.Y.2d 96, was a court case chiefly concerning subjective and objective standards of reasonableness in using deadly force for self-defense; the New York Court of Appeals held that a hybrid objective-subjective standard was mandated by New York law.

The crime against nature or unnatural act has historically been a legal term in English-speaking states identifying forms of sexual behavior not considered natural or decent and are legally punishable offenses. Sexual practices that have historically been considered to be "crimes against nature" include masturbation, sodomy and bestiality.

In the English law of homicide, manslaughter is a less serious offence than murder, the differential being between levels of fault based on the mens rea or by reason of a partial defence. In England and Wales, a common practice is to prefer a charge of murder, with the judge or defence able to introduce manslaughter as an option. The jury then decides whether the defendant is guilty or not guilty of either murder or manslaughter. On conviction for manslaughter, sentencing is at the judge's discretion, whereas a sentence of life imprisonment is mandatory on conviction for murder. Manslaughter may be either voluntary or involuntary, depending on whether the accused has the required mens rea for murder.

Collateral consequences of criminal conviction are the additional civil state penalties, mandated by statute, that attach to a criminal conviction. They are not part of the direct consequences of criminal conviction, such as prison, fines, or probation. They are the further civil actions by the state that are triggered as a consequence of the conviction.

The Criminal Cases Review Commission (CCRC) is the statutory body responsible for investigating alleged miscarriages of justice in England, Wales, and Northern Ireland. It was established by Section 8 of the Criminal Appeal Act 1995 and began work on 31 March 1997. The commission is the only body in its area of jurisdiction with the power to send a case back to an appeals court if it concludes that there is a real possibility that the court will overturn a conviction or reduce a sentence. Since starting work in 1997, it has on average referred 33 cases a year for appeal.

State v. Mitchell, 170 Mo. 633, 71 S.W. 175 (1902), is a precedent-setting decision of the Supreme Court of Missouri which is part of the body of case law involving the prosecution of failed attempts to commit a crime. In United States law, cases involving failed criminal attempts can bring up interesting legal issues of whether the crime was unsuccessful due to factual impossibility or to legal impossibility.

In Australia, murder is a criminal offence where a person, by a voluntary act or omission, causes the death of another person with either intent to kill, intent to inflict grievous bodily harm, or with reckless indifference to human life. It may also arise in circumstances where the accused was committing, or assisting in the commission, of a different serious crime that results in a person's death. It is usually punished by life imprisonment.

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

Criminal law is a system of laws that is connected with crimes and punishments of an individual who commits crimes. In comparison, civil law is where the case argues their issues with one entity to another entity with support of the law. Crimes can vary in definition by jurisdiction but the basis for a crime are fairly consistent regardless.

In English criminal law, an inchoate offence is an offence relating to a criminal act which has not, or not yet, been committed. The main inchoate offences are attempting to commit; encouraging or assisting crime; and conspiring to commit. Attempts, governed by the Criminal Attempts Act 1981, are defined as situations where an individual who intends to commit an offence does an act which is "more than merely preparatory" in the offence's commission. Traditionally this definition has caused problems, with no firm rule on what constitutes a "more than merely preparatory" act, but broad judicial statements give some guidance. Incitement, on the other hand, is an offence under the common law, and covers situations where an individual encourages another person to engage in activities which will result in a criminal act taking place, and intends for this act to occur. As a criminal activity, incitement had a particularly broad remit, covering "a suggestion, proposal, request, exhortation, gesture, argument, persuasion, inducement, goading or the arousal of cupidity". Incitement was abolished by the Serious Crime Act 2007, but continues in other offences and as the basis of the new offence of "encouraging or assisting" the commission of a crime.

Peter J. McQuillan was an American judge and jurist. In legal circles, McQuillan was most noted for his work and expertise in the complete revision of the New York State penal code in the 1960s, the first major overhaul of that law since the 1800s.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">French criminal law</span>

Criminal law in France is one of the branches of the juridical system of the French Republic. The field of criminal law is defined as a sector of French law, and is a combination of public and private law, insofar as it punishes private behavior on behalf of society as a whole. Its function is to define, categorize, prevent, and punish criminal offenses committed by a person, whether a natural person or a juridical person. In this sense it is of a punitive nature, as opposed to civil law in France, which settles disputes between individuals, or administrative law which deals with issues between individuals and government.

References

  1. Criminal Law - Cases and Materials, 7th ed. 2012, Wolters Kluwer Law & Business; John Kaplan (law professor), Robert Weisberg, Guyora Binder, ISBN   978-1-4548-0698-1,
  2. New York v. Rizzo, 221 A.D. 353, 223 N.Y.S. 200 (App. Div. 1st Dept. 1927)
  3. People v. Rizzo, 246 N.Y. 334, 158 N.E. 888 (1927)

Text of People v. Rizzo is available from:  vLex