By Wesley Newcomb Hohfeld
Hohfeld's writings, from 1913 and 1917, delve into the differences among such felony thoughts as privilege and accountability, and correct, immunity and legal responsibility, and so on.
Read or Download Fundamental legal conceptions, as applied in judicial reasoning (A Yale paperbound) PDF
Best legal theory & systems books
BOOKS IN SPANISH
Social paintings and the Courts is a compendium of the latest and critical felony situations in social paintings and social welfare. Its dissection and research of an important circumstances makes it a good software for instructing social staff to appreciate the criminal process and its operation. The booklet demonstrates how courts view and care for the functionality, motion, and behavior of social staff and their companies.
Estate legislations and Social Morality develops a thought of estate that highlights the social building of duties that folks owe one another. by means of viewing estate legislations throughout the lens of duties instead of during the lens of rights, the writer affirms the lifestyles of vital estate rights (when no legal responsibility to a different exists) and defines the scope of these rights (when a duty to a different does exist).
- Interpretation and Legal Theory
- The Bramble Bush: On Our Law and Its Study
- The Ethics of Deference: Learning from Law’s Morals
- Multicultural Jurisdictions: Cultural Differences and Women's Rights (Contemporary Political Theory)
- I Do Solemnly Swear: The Moral Obligations of Legal Officials
Additional info for Fundamental legal conceptions, as applied in judicial reasoning (A Yale paperbound)
In Routledge Encyclopedia of Narrative Theory, edited by D. Herman, M. Jahn, and M. Ryan, Routledge. PART ONE Analyzing Legal Translations on the Ground 2 Translating Defendants’ Apologies during Allocution at Sentencing M. 1 In this paper, Gruber uses sociolinguistic analysis to explore communication problems that arise in courtroom exchanges between defendants and judges. Specifically, she examines the different possible meanings of apologies made to the court by convicted defendants during their sentencing hearings.
What we are calling disciplinary “languages” here would generally be referred to as registers within fields such as sociolinguistics and linguistic anthropology. , meta-level, culturally informed ideas about how language works)—and one that can actively hinder understanding. If we think of the differences in forms of disciplines’ communication as differences in “languages” that need “translation,” we may take more seriously the divisions that lead to failures in interdisciplinary understandings.
Allocution also comes with risks, however. As noted by O’Hear (1997) and Natapoff (2005), one of the main risks for defendants—especially those who have pleaded guilty (and this is the vast majority2)—is that the defendant might speak in such a way as to suggest that she/he had not fully accepted responsibility for the crime. At federal sentencing hearings, judges generally impose sentences based on the Federal Sentencing Guidelines. Defendants get assigned a particular range of months of incarceration based on the intersection of their total offense level and their criminal history category.