criminal defenses and criminal punishments 7 – Professional Essay Writing Service

Assignment 2: Criminal Defenses and Criminal Punishments
Due Week 7 and worth 170 points
It is common knowledge that two controversial issues in the American legal system are the types of criminal defenses and the manner of criminal punishment. In this assignment, you will explore both in their various forms.

Use the Internet or Strayer databases to research the types of criminal defenses and the manner of criminal punishment.

Write a four to six (4-6) page paper in which you:
1. Specify the key points involved in the court determining the lawfulness of the use of force. Next, identify and then discuss the relevance of the factors a court or a jury will consider in determining what force is reasonable in self-defense.
2. Argue for or against the use of the Castle Doctrine or stand your ground laws as a defense to prevent the rendering of a guilty verdict in a criminal homicide case. Provide a rationale to support your response.
3. Compare and contrast the defenses of diplomatic, legislative, and witness immunity. Analyze the overall role that the defenses play within the criminal justice system. Next, evaluate the general level of fairness of witness immunity to the defense. Provide a rationale to support your response.
4. Specify the two elements of the defense of entrapment. Next, support or critique the value of the defense within the criminal law system in the United States. Justify your response.
5. Argue for or against the “Three Strikes”laws. Provide a rationale to support your response.
6. Use at least three quality academic resources in this assignment. Note: Wikipedia and similar types of websites do not qualify as academic resources.
Your assignment must follow these formatting requirements:
- This course requires use of new Strayer Writing Standards (SWS). The format is different than other Strayer University courses. Please take a moment to review the SWS documentation for details.
- Be typed, double spaced, using Times New Roman font (size 12), with one-inch margins on all sides; citations and references must follow SWS or school-specific format. Check with your professor for any additional instructions.
- Include a cover page containing the title of the assignment, the student’s name, the professor’s name, the course title, and the date. The cover page and the reference page are not included in the required assignment page length.
The specific course learning outcomes associated with this assignment are:
- Describe the nature and history of American criminal law.
- Explain the role of individuals and federal, state, and local government agencies in crime fighting and prosecution of criminal offenses.
- Analyze the essential legal elements of criminal conduct.
- Contrast crimes against persons, crimes against property, and other types of criminal conduct.
- Use technology and information resources to research issues in criminal law.
- Write clearly and concisely about criminal law using proper writing mechanics.
Grading for this assignment will be based on answer quality, logic / organization of the paper, and language and writing skills, using the following rubric.

Points: 170

Points: 170	Assignment 2: Criminal Defenses and Criminal Punishments
Criteria	Unacceptable Below 60% F	Meets Minimum Expectations 60-69% D	Fair 70-79% C	Proficient 80-89% B	Exemplary 90-100% A
1. Specify the key points involved in the court determining the lawfulness of the use of force. Next, identify and then discuss the relevance of the factors a court or a jury will consider in determining what force is reasonable in self-defense. Weight: 15%	Did not submit or incompletely specified the key points involved in the court determining the lawfulness of the use of force. Did not submit or incompletely identified and discussed the relevance of the factors a court or a jury will consider in determining what force is reasonable in self-defense.	Insufficiently specified the key points involved in the court determining the lawfulness of the use of force. Insufficiently identified and discussed the relevance of the factors a court or a jury will consider in determining what force is reasonable in self-defense.	Partially specified the key points involved in the court determining the lawfulness of the use of force. Partially identified and discussed the relevance of the factors a court or a jury will consider in determining what force is reasonable in self-defense.	Satisfactorily specified the key points involved in the court determining the lawfulness of the use of force. Satisfactorily identified and discussed the relevance of the factors a court or a jury will consider in determining what force is reasonable in self-defense.	Thoroughly specified the key points involved in the court determining the lawfulness of the use of force. Thoroughly identified and discussed the relevance of the factors a court or a jury will consider in determining what force is reasonable in self-defense.
2. Argue for or against the use of the Castle Doctrine or stand your ground laws as a defense to prevent the rendering of a guilty verdict in a criminal homicide case. Provide a rationale to support your response. Weight: 20%	Did not submit or incompletely argued for or against the use of the Castle Doctrine or stand your ground laws as a defense to prevent the rendering of a guilty verdict in a criminal homicide case. Did not submit or incompletely provided a rationale to support your response.	Insufficiently argued for or against the use of the Castle Doctrine or stand your ground laws as a defense to prevent the rendering of a guilty verdict in a criminal homicide case. Insufficiently provided a rationale to support your response.	Partially argued for or against the use of the Castle Doctrine or stand your ground laws as a defense to prevent the rendering of a guilty verdict in a criminal homicide case. Partially provided a rationale to support your response.	Satisfactorily argued for or against the use of the Castle Doctrine or stand your ground laws as a defense to prevent the rendering of a guilty verdict in a criminal homicide case. Satisfactorily provided a rationale to support your response.	Thoroughly argued for or against the use of the Castle Doctrine or stand your ground laws as a defense to prevent the rendering of a guilty verdict in a criminal homicide case. Thoroughly provided a rationale to support your response.
3. Compare and contrast the defenses of diplomatic, legislative, and witness immunity. Analyze the overall role that the defenses play within the criminal justice system. Next, evaluate the general level of fairness of witness immunity to the defense. Provide a rationale to support your response. Weight: 20%	Did not submit or incompletely compared and contrasted the defenses of diplomatic, legislative, and witness immunity. Did not submit or incompletely analyzed the overall role that the defenses play within the criminal justice system and evaluated the general level of fairness of witness immunity to the defense. Did not submit or incompletely provided a rationale to support your response.	Insufficiently compared and contrasted the defenses of diplomatic, legislative, and witness immunity. Insufficiently analyzed the overall role that the defenses play within the criminal justice system and evaluated the general level of fairness of witness immunity to the defense. Insufficiently provided a rationale to support your response.	Partially incompletely compared and contrasted the defenses of diplomatic, legislative, and witness immunity. Partially analyzed the overall role that the defenses play within the criminal justice system and evaluated the general level of fairness of witness immunity to the defense. Partially provided a rationale to support your response.	Satisfactorily compared and contrasted the defenses of diplomatic, legislative, and witness immunity. Satisfactorily analyzed the overall role that the defenses play within the criminal justice system and evaluated the general level of fairness of witness immunity to the defense. Satisfactorily provided a rationale to support your response.	Thoroughly compared and contrasted the defenses of diplomatic, legislative, and witness immunity. Thoroughly analyzed the overall role that the defenses play within the criminal justice system and evaluated the general level of fairness of witness immunity to the defense. Thoroughly provided a rationale to support your response.
4. Specify the two elements of the defense of entrapment. Next, support or critique the value of the defense within the criminal law system in the United States. Justify your response. Weight: 15%	Did not submit or incompletely specified the two elements of the defense of entrapment. Next, support or critique the value of the defense within the criminal law system in the United States. Did not submit or incompletely justified your response.	Insufficiently specified the two elements of the defense of entrapment. Next, support or critique the value of the defense within the criminal law system in the United States. Insufficiently justified your response.	Partially specified the two elements of the defense of entrapment. Next, support or critique the value of the defense within the criminal law system in the United States. Partially justified your response.	Satisfactorily specified the two elements of the defense of entrapment. Next, support or critique the value of the defense within the criminal law system in the United States. Satisfactorily justified your response.	Thoroughly specified the two elements of the defense of entrapment. Next, support or critique the value of the defense within the criminal law system in the United States. Thoroughly justified your response.
5. Argue for or against the â€œThree Strikesâ€ laws. Provide a rationale to support your response. Weight: 15%	Did not submit or incompletely argued for or against the â€œThree Strikesâ€ laws. Did not submit or incompletely provided a rationale to support your response.	Insufficiently argued for or against the â€œThree Strikesâ€ laws. Insufficiently provided a rationale to support your response.	Partially argued for or against the â€œThree Strikesâ€ laws. Partially provided a rationale to support your response.	Satisfactorily argued for or against the â€œThree Strikesâ€ laws. Satisfactorily provided a rationale to support your response.	Thoroughly argued for or against the â€œThree Strikesâ€ laws. Thoroughly provided a rationale to support your response.
6. Cite 3 references. Weight: 5%	No references provided.	Does not meet the required number of references; all references poor quality choices.	Does not meet the required number of references; some references poor quality choices.	Meets number of required references; all references high quality choices.	Exceeds number of required references; all references high quality choices.
7. Clarity, writing mechanics, and formatting requirements Weight: 10%	More than 8 errors present.	7-8 errors present.	5-6 errors present.	3-4 errors present.	0-2 errors present.