University of Virginia Legal Working Paper Series

Series Home | UVA School of Law Home Page

University of Virginia Public Law and Legal Theory Working Paper Series

 

Proportional Mens Rea

Stephen F. Smith, University of Virginia School of Law

Abstract

In this essay, I criticize the narrow conception of “innocence” on which federal mens-rea doctrine currently rests and argue for a broader, proportionality-based approach to mens rea. A narrow definition of innocence limited to morally blameless behavior illogically restricts the scope of mens-rea doctrine. The objection to punishing morally blameless conduct is that such punishment is not morally deserved. The same result – morally undeserved punishment – results when blameworthy conduct is subjected to disproportionately severe punishment. A broader definition of “innocence” that includes proportionality concerns would thus be more intellectually sound and better achieve the objective of preventing morally undeserved punishment.

Subject Area

Criminal Law and Procedure, Public Law and Legal Theory

Recommended Citation

Stephen F. Smith, "Proportional Mens Rea" (August 2008). University of Virginia Legal Working Paper Series. University of Virginia Public Law and Legal Theory Working Paper Series. Working Paper 97.
http://law.bepress.com/uvalwps/uva_publiclaw/art97

No readers' reactions have been posted for this article. To submit one, copy the URL for this article (http://law.bepress.com/uvalwps/uva_publiclaw/art97) and click here.