A prosecutor's duty is to defer and produce evidence of the crime at hand to the judge and jury so that they can decide an appropriate sentence. According to the case of State v. Stu Dents, there are several charges against the defendant which range from moderate to severe. These charges include homicide, assault of a police officer, kidnapping, burglary, and crimes related to drugs. The prosecution must attempt to provide accurate evidence to prove the charges against Stu Dents. During this trial, the prosecution will evaluate the laws and statutes of Hawaii, Virginia, Arkansas, North Carolina, and Pennsylvania to determine which state the case is the strongest. The prosecution will examine each of these states thoroughly to provide a better understanding of the charges, which will provide a guideline in determining the best sentencing alternatives. Facts and Elements
The prosecution must establish the facts and elements of each crime to prove a defendant's guilt. The elements of crime are the basic components of the crime, and the essential features of that crime specified by law or statute. These elements include actus reus, mens rea, and a concurrence of the two. To convict the defendant of a particular crime, the prosecution must establish that each of the required elements are present in the facts to prove criminal liability (Schmalleger, Hall, & Dolatowski, 2010). In the case of State v. Stu Dents, the prosecution must establish the facts and elements of the charges for homicide, assault of a police officer, kidnapping, burglary, and crimes related to drugs. For the charge of homicide, all of the required elements are present in the facts of the case. The journal entries discussing the purchase of rope, rags, and a sharp hunting knife "to fulfill [his] destiny" prove mens rea. Actus reus is proven in the evidence that the victim was found with cloth stuffed in her mouth, arms and legs tied with rope restraints, and stabbed to death. The defendant's intent to commit the crime is proven by the journal entries, and the proof that he engaged in the criminal conduct is evident in the gagging, restraining, and stabbing death of the victim (University of Phoenix, n.d.). For the charge of assault of a police officer, all of the required elements are present in the facts of the case. When police officers attempted to take him into custody, he was extremely agitated, irrational, combative, and screaming about the end of the world and aliens working in the police force, which proves mens rea. Actus reus is proven when the defendant punched the officer in the face while the officer attempted to handcuff him. The defendant's intent to cause bodily harm to the officer by punching him proves the presence of intent and conduct (University of Phoenix, n.d.). For the charge of kidnapping, all of the required elements are present in the facts of the case. Mens rea is proven from the evidence officers found in the defendant's home, which included a timeline of more than 300 photos of the victim in various locations and situations. It appears as if some photos were taken without the victim's knowledge. Actus reus is proven by the evidence of cuts and bruises found on the victim's body as well as skin particles under her fingernails, which signify a struggle prior to death. The DNA of the skin particles matched samples of the defendant's DNA. Therefore, the defendant's intent to seize unlawfully and carry away the victim by force, as indicated by the evidence of struggle, proves the presence of intent and conduct (University of Phoenix, n.d.). For the charge of burglary, all of the required elements are present in the facts of the case. Mens rea is proven from witness testimony stating that the defendant entered the victim's apartment when she was not home, and there was no proof that he used a key. Actus reus is proven when a search of the defendant's home produced drugs and jewelry owned...
Please join StudyMode to read the full document