Violent Habitual Offenders

Paper Summary:

In 1997 the Supreme Court established a precedent for detaining a habitual violent criminal beyond the limits of his prison term in the case of 'Kansas Vs. Hendricks'. Judge Clarence Thomas wrote the majority opinion, which stated that the Kansas statute allowing the action neither violated the civil rights of the defendant nor constituted ex post facto lawmaking. This paper examines the issue of committing violent repeat offenders and looks at other options beyond the obvious choice of prison.

From the Paper:

"The prediction of future behavior is a concept that is not recognized in American jurisprudence. The law and the constitution hold that a person may not be deprived of life and liberty without due process. Due process is not defined as including any prediction of future behavior by any panel of experts, medical or judicial. From this perspective, committing a person because he is judged to have a mental condition that would make him likely to commit the crime again would be patently unconstitutional. The compulsion to commit an offense, a previous record of certain offenses or a psychiatric pathology that usually results in a type of behavior in no way is a guarantee that the offense will be committed."

More papers on Violent Habitual Offenders:

• Persuasive Essay # 119906 : "Jessica's Law"
• Argumentative Essay # 102029 : "The Three Strikes Mandatory Sentencing Law"
• Persuasive Essay # 127286 : "Do Long Prison Sentences Deter Crime?"

APA Citation:

MLA Citation: