We found a match
Your institution may have access to this item. Find your institution then sign in to continue.
- Title
THE ROLE OF COMMON LAW CONCEPTS IN MODERN CRIMINAL JURISPRUDENCE (A SYMPOSIUM) II. Infamy and the Officeholder.
- Authors
Stemm, Paul G.
- Abstract
This article offers comments on the role of common law concepts in modern criminal jurisprudence in the U.S. Often times, considerations of ability, experience, honesty, and temperament are involved in qualifying a person to hold public office. Certainly, a majority of the votes is a prime requisite. Most of the statutes regulating office holding, however, are agreed on at least one point that persons convicted of an infamous crime are not eligible to hold public office. The determination by courts and legislatures of what constitutes an infamous crime has been largely made upon the basis of two tests. In the first, the nature of the offense is examined, while, in the second, the punishment which may be imposed is considered the dominant factor. Each test was founded upon sound reason and well-ordered thought in its inception, but each has been twisted to fit situations to which it is patently unsuited. In contrast to the original test of the nature of the crime, at the present time the controlling factor seems to be the nature of the punishment which may be imposed. Underlying the restrictions imposed upon public officials as a result of a conviction for an infamous crime is a general public policy against placing trust and confidence in one who has been convicted of a serious crime.
- Subjects
UNITED States; COMMON law; CRIMINAL justice system; PUBLIC officers; POLITICAL candidates; PUBLIC administration; INFAMY (Law)
- Publication
Journal of Criminal Law, Criminology & Police Science, 1958, Vol 49, Issue 3, p250
- ISSN
0022-0205
- Publication type
Article
- DOI
10.2307/1141394