Arrestees and Non-arrestees
James
James gets arrested for check fraud for failing to submit Michael’s checkbook to the bank when he found it on the bank’s sidewalk. He will be arrested for forgery, forging Michael’s signature, writing checks to himself, which all constitute crimes against property. James will be liable to identity theft charges for signing Michael’s check identity and signing in the pretense of being Michael. Depending on the total of the amounts for the checks James wrote, if they exceeded $950, he will be arrested for a felony, or the same could happen if James had a previous conviction of particular forgery crimes.
Michael
Michael will be arrested for aggravated assault, robbery with violence, and having outlawed drugs, Cocaine. Michael will be charged for taking matters into his own hands and instead of reporting to the bank and the authorities when he found his lost checkbook in possession of James. Michael will be charged for forcefully taking James’ wallet, cellphone, and necklace.
Delegate your assignment to our experts and they will do the rest.
Andrew
According to law, Andrew will be arrested for being an accomplice to the crime as they are criminally liable for the acts committed by Michael because he aided, assisted, and encouraged Michael to commit the crime. The criminal offense is further corroborated because Andrew accepted payment of a gold necklace from Michael for being an accomplice ”peeping” to ensure no one saw or interferes when Michael was assaulting James. Every state has statutes and laws that require the return of property or money if it is possible to identify the owner. In James's case, he was required to return the checkbook to the bank as the owner is easily identifiable. Alternatively, he could have contacted the local law enforcement agencies as he had a legal obligation to return lost things to the owners. James also had the option of enlisting an attorney who would help him ensure the return of the property to Michael, the rightful owner. Andrew will also be charged for having and selling stolen property (the golden necklace).
Bobby
Bobby will be arrested for purchasing stolen property, the golden ring. However, he might be let off the hook for his action of reporting to the authorities when he noticed blood on the golden necklace. His diligence of reporting to the authorities and his suspicion will help him in defense since he did not have prior knowledge of the necklace's original ownership.
The laws and statutes that apply to each party in the case
James
Title 18 of the U.S. Code and the New York Panel Law covers conduct such as counterfeit and forgery and espionage. In this case, James’ forging Michael’s signature and writing checks to himself and cashing them will violate the law and statute. Penal code sections 470 to 472 covers forgery in creating or changing certain documents with the intent to commit fraud, as is the case of James when the person knows they have no authority to do so. James falsely signed and materially altered writing to fraudulently acquire Michael’s cash and to commit fraud. Each state has its laws on forgery, and thus depending on which state the crime was committed, James could be charged with either misdemeanor or felony as it's clear James intended to commit the fraud.
Michael
The law 1610 on Assault -18 U.S.C. 351 E covers assault in various categories (Brown, 2018). The first that results in personal injury are punishable by ten years of imprisonment and a fine, while others are punishable by a year’s imprisonment and a fine. The law applies to the case of Michael assaulting James. The criminal land tort laws will cover assault and crime against property. The federal law 21 U.S. C 844 (a) covers possession of drugs such as Cocaine in the case of Michael, who was found in possession of the drug. Other laws that cover drugs are 21 U.S. C 853, 862, and 841 (Lowy, 2020). Additionally, the law on Aggravated assault 4 (d) covers attacks against another individual by intentionally causing harm using feet. Arms, Hands. Or teeth in actions that could lead to severe or aggravated injury to the victim.
Andrew
The federal law 1610 Assault- 18 U.S. C 351 E will cover Andrew’s participation in the assault against James by Michael (Shapiro, 2019). The law considers helping another person commit aggravated assault as being part of the crime. As is the case with Andrew, he helped Michael by looking out for people and received payment for contributing to the assault. It’s a federal crime under the18 U.S. C 23415 to knowingly receive, conceal, or dispose of stolen property and in additional cases of interstate commerce (Mohseny & Jalilzadeh, 2017). In this case, Andrew knowingly had the golden necklace robbed by Michael from James and further sold it to Bobby on the Swap market.
Bobby
The law covering purchasing or having stolen property 18 U.S. C 2315 would apply to Bobby’s case (Lewandowski & Jeffrey B. Bumgarner, 2020). However, since he did not purchase the necklace with the prior knowledge of it being a stolen property, he will not likely be guilty under the law. Furthermore, his gesture of reporting it to the police since he suspected to make things better for him as he quickly raised the issue with the right authorities when he noticed something wrong.
The analysis of laws applicable to each involved party
James’s degree of participation in the check fraud crime is principal as he knowingly forges Michael’s signature. After picking the checkbook, he intentionally forges Michael’s signature and writes checks to himself with all the awareness that it's a crime. He goes further to cash the checks and will be answerable to the crimes as doer or perpetrator. James satisfies the elements of being a principal member as he meets the mens rea , capacity, and actus reus of common purpose in committing the crime. He also meets the instrumentality requirement as he commits the crime himself that clears any doubts of someone else procuring him to commit the check fraud crime. James does not have a good defense as he intentionally commits the check fraud crime in his rightful mind, alone without anyone coercing him.
Michael is the principal perpetrator in both the assault crime against James and is the possession of Cocaine. However, it is a co-perpetrator in the necklace's offense as he aided the robbery and sale of the necklace. Michael is also the principal perpetrator in the robbery crime with violence as Michael forcefully assaulted and took property that belongs to James without his consent. He robbed James of his wallet, wallet, and a golden necklace. James has no good defense when it comes to being the possession of Cocaine as he is caught red-handed with the police. He could have some defense is it established that the Cocaine in his possession was medically approved by a doctor/ or registered physical for a medical condition he has, but this is unlikely to be the case.
Andrew was an accessory to Michael's aggravated assault crime as Andrew aids him in committing the act. He looks out for any persons that would interfere or discover the assault going on from Michael against James. In terms of having the stolen property and selling it, Andrew is a dader/perpetrator as he knowingly accepts the necklace as payment and knows it belongs to James. There is a clear causal connection between Andrew’s assistance and Michael committing of the crime.
Bobby is only an accessory by purchasing the stolen necklace from Andrew. He has a good defense as reported to the authorities, when he noticed blood on the necklace. Moreover, he helped the police to trace the perpetrator to the original one, Michael and James.
References
Brown, D. K. (2018). Criminal Enforcement Redundancy: Oversight of Decisions Not to Prosecute. Minn. L. Rev., 103 , 843.
Lewandowski, C., & Jeffrey B. Bumgarner. (2020). Criminal Justice in America: The Encyclopedia of Crime, Law Enforcement, Courts, and Corrections. ABC-CLIO.
Lowy, J. E. (2020). Comments on Assault Weapons, the Right to Arms, and the Right to Live. Harv. JL & Pub. Pol'y, 43 , 375.
Mohseny, F., & Jalilzadeh, M. (2017). The Presence of the Private Sector in Criminal Justice Enforcement and Its Comparative Study in the Criminal Laws of Iran and the U.S.A. Journal of History Culture and Art Research, 6(6) , 39-46.
Shapiro, L. R. (2019). Gender Stereotypes and Criminal Offending. The Encyclopedia of Women and Crime , 1-3.
