Criminal jurisdiction
Encyclopedia
Criminal jurisdiction is a term used in constitutional law
and public law
to describe the power of court
s to hear a case brought by a state
accusing a defendant
of the commission of a crime
. It is relevant in three distinct situations:
states are sovereign
within their own territorial boundaries, this is a new one. A few states such as the Netherlands
have adopted a monist approach, i.e. they accept international and municipal laws as part of a single system. Thus, whether a supranational court or tribunal has criminal jurisdiction over its territory or citizens, will be determined by international law. The majority of states are dualist, i.e. they will only accept international obligations through the process of incorporation, say by signing and adopting treaties
and conventions. Hence, whether a supranational court or tribunal will have jurisdiction and, if so, over what subject matter and over what period of time, will be decided by the sovereign government
of the day.
s it wishes. Thus, State A would have the power to make a law which, for example, made it an offence to smoke in the streets of State B, a neighbouring state. State A could employ officers and equip them with cameras. These officers could then collect evidence in State B and, when its citizens returned home, State A could prosecute them for breach of the law. But State A's law could not be directly effective
in State B because that would make State B less than sovereign. Similarly, State A could not seek the extradition
of its own citizens from State B unless State B was formally to consent (usually through the negotiation of a treaty including the particular offence).
justification to exercise jurisdiction over crimes committed by, or crimes committed against their citizens, even though these crimes are committed outside their borders. Thus, one of the classifications of crime is "crimes against the state". These are crimes that affect the interests of the state or its administration. In extreme cases, a state may wish to prosecute one of its own citizens for treason
even though all the relevant acts and omissions took place in another state. Similarly, if a citizen of State A is acting in a way that interferes with the friendly relations between State A and State B, it may be expedient to prosecute this citizen no matter where the relevant acts have been committed. Jurisdiction may also be claimed over crimes on board the ship
s and aircraft
operated by corporation
s based in the given state, no matter where these craft may be located at the relevant time. In English law
, where murder
and manslaughter
are concerned, the English court has jurisdiction over offences committed abroad, if it was committed by a British citizen (see section 9 of the Offences against the Person Act 1861
and section 3 of the British Nationality Act 1948
). In R v Cheong (2006) AER (D) 385 the appellant was living in Guyana in 1983. He shot and killed a man who had just robbed his wife and sister-in-law. Under local law he was charged only with the unlicensed possession of a firearm; but as a British citizen, section 9 of the 1861 Act applied when he returned to England and he was charged with murder. On appeal, a conviction for manslaughter was upheld. At a level of conventional policy, there are two main theories to justify the exercise of jurisdiction:
In English law, see the definition of a deception which must be the operative cause of the "obtaining" in the deception offences and under the Theft Act 1978
, and note that all the inchoate offences
s move in time and across borders so that an attempt continues from the proximate act until failure, a conspiracy
agreement is not limited to a particular place, and the encouragement by a secondary party as an accessory
continues until the principal commits the substantive offence.
). The justification is less clear when the place of injury is an accident. Within a single state, the doctrine of transferred intent
would apply to criminalise accidental departures from a planned attack, but if X's letter is redirected out of State A by one of Y's helpful relatives, the receipt of the letter by Y on holiday in State B is entirely outside X's actual intention (just it might be irrelevant to a sender where the recipient of an e-mail
is resident). Alternatively, suppose that X physically attacks Y in State A, intending to kill him. Both are nationals
of State A. Y is seriously injured and, because the hospitals in State B have a superior track record for treating injuries of this type, Y arranges to be transferred to State B where he later dies. Again, there is no causal connection between X's initial criminal acts and the territory of State B, and seeking to found jurisdiction simply on the ground that Y died within its borders, is not wholly convincing given that Y is not a national of State B and so neither owes allegiance
nor is owed any duty of protection as a part of State B's social contract.
is a federation of sovereign states. The U.S. Constitution creates a federal government and legislature which has general powers over the territory of the whole and over foreign policy, whereas the individual states have their own governments that, within the scope allowed by the federal constitution, have local territorial jurisdiction. There is a system of federal courts
which have jurisdiction to hear charges alleging federal crimes, and state courts have jurisdiction to hear charges alleging violations of local state law.
(implied from the Article I grant of taxing power from the Taxing and Spending Clause
and the Sixteenth Amendment
); possessing illegal substances (under the Commerce Clause
); infringement of patents (Article I, § 8); and conspiring to violate civil rights
(under the Fourteenth Amendment). Courts have given a particularly broad interpretation to the Commerce Clause power, permitting Congress to make a federal crime of many common law crimes such as kidnapping or murder if state lines are crossed during commission of the crime, and such as embezzlement and blackmail using instrumentalities of commerce such as telephone lines or the U.S. mail.
Examples of crimes that are based on areas owned by or under the exclusive control of the federal government include crimes committed in the District of Columbia, in U.S. Territories
, in U.S. National Parks, in federal courthouses
and federal prison
s, and aboard airplanes (regulated by the Federal Aviation Administration
) and ocean-going vessels. The United States military has its own criminal justice system applicable to its members, but civilians may be charged with a federal crime for acts committed on military bases. Federal courts can also assert jurisdiction to hear cases brought against U.S. citizens based on their illegal activities in other countries.
The Sixth Amendment calls for trial “by an impartial jury of the State and district wherein the crime shall have been committed.” Within the federal court system, Rule 18 of the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure
specifies which federal court may hear a particular criminal case:
Anderson, 328 U.S., at 703 holds: “[T]he locus delicti must be determined from the nature of the crime alleged and the location of the act or acts constituting it.” In Hyde v. United States, 225 U.S. 347 (1912) although none of the defendants had entered the District of Columbia as part of their conspiracy to defraud the United States, they were convicted because one co-conspirator had committed overt acts in Columbia (225 U.S., at 363). So conspiracy is a continuing offense committed in all the districts where a co-conspirator acts on the agreement. Similarly, In re Palliser, 136 U.S. 257 (1890) the sending of letters from New York to postmasters in Connecticut in an attempt to gain postage on credit, made Connecticut, where the mail he addressed and dispatched was received, an appropriate venue (136 U.S., at 266—268). See 18 U.S.C. § 3237(a):
This was applied in United States v. Johnson, 323 U.S. 273, 275 (1944) so that “an illegal use of the mails … may subject the user to prosecution in the district where he sent the goods, or in the district of their arrival, or in any intervening district.”
and/or the Department of Justice
. This creates tensions between the two systems because the individual states in which aspects of the criminal activity have taken place may wish to assert jurisdiction over that part, whereas the federal authorities will wish to consolidate the wrongdoing across several states into a single trial
.
One significant result of the concurrent jurisdiction
between state and federal courts (and in some cases between different state courts) is that an individual who violates both state and federal law, or the laws of multiple states, can be separately charged and tried in each jurisdiction. Thus, a resident of Virginia
who defrauds a Florida
resident through the mail may be tried in Virginia state court and in a Florida state court, and in a federal court in either Florida or Virginia. A famous example of dual state and federal sovereignty is the Rodney King
case. Police officers who beat motorist Rodney King were acquitted of assault charges in the California
state court, but were convicted of violating King's civil rights - based on the same events - in a federal court in California.
Constitutional law
Constitutional law is the body of law which defines the relationship of different entities within a state, namely, the executive, the legislature and the judiciary....
and public law
Public law
Public law is a theory of law governing the relationship between individuals and the state. Under this theory, constitutional law, administrative law and criminal law are sub-divisions of public law...
to describe the power of court
Court
A court is a form of tribunal, often a governmental institution, with the authority to adjudicate legal disputes between parties and carry out the administration of justice in civil, criminal, and administrative matters in accordance with the rule of law...
s to hear a case brought by a state
State (polity)
A state is an organized political community, living under a government. States may be sovereign and may enjoy a monopoly on the legal initiation of force and are not dependent on, or subject to any other power or state. Many states are federated states which participate in a federal union...
accusing a defendant
Defendant
A defendant or defender is any party who is required to answer the complaint of a plaintiff or pursuer in a civil lawsuit before a court, or any party who has been formally charged or accused of violating a criminal statute...
of the commission of a crime
Crime
Crime is the breach of rules or laws for which some governing authority can ultimately prescribe a conviction...
. It is relevant in three distinct situations:
- to regulate the relationship between states, or between one state and another;
- where the nationNationA nation may refer to a community of people who share a common language, culture, ethnicity, descent, and/or history. In this definition, a nation has no physical borders. However, it can also refer to people who share a common territory and government irrespective of their ethnic make-up...
is a federationFederationA federation , also known as a federal state, is a type of sovereign state characterized by a union of partially self-governing states or regions united by a central government...
, to regulate the relationship between the federal courts and the domestic courts of those states comprising the federation; and - where a state only has, to a greater or lesser extent, a single and unified system of law, it is the law of criminal procedureCriminal procedureCriminal procedure refers to the legal process for adjudicating claims that someone has violated criminal law.-Basic rights:Currently, in many countries with a democratic system and the rule of law, criminal procedure puts the burden of proof on the prosecution – that is, it is up to the...
to regulate what cases each classification of court within the judicial system shall adjudicate upon.
Supranational courts
Under the public international law system, de jureDe jure
De jure is an expression that means "concerning law", as contrasted with de facto, which means "concerning fact".De jure = 'Legally', De facto = 'In fact'....
states are sovereign
Sovereignty
Sovereignty is the quality of having supreme, independent authority over a geographic area, such as a territory. It can be found in a power to rule and make law that rests on a political fact for which no purely legal explanation can be provided...
within their own territorial boundaries, this is a new one. A few states such as the Netherlands
Netherlands
The Netherlands is a constituent country of the Kingdom of the Netherlands, located mainly in North-West Europe and with several islands in the Caribbean. Mainland Netherlands borders the North Sea to the north and west, Belgium to the south, and Germany to the east, and shares maritime borders...
have adopted a monist approach, i.e. they accept international and municipal laws as part of a single system. Thus, whether a supranational court or tribunal has criminal jurisdiction over its territory or citizens, will be determined by international law. The majority of states are dualist, i.e. they will only accept international obligations through the process of incorporation, say by signing and adopting treaties
Treaty
A treaty is an express agreement under international law entered into by actors in international law, namely sovereign states and international organizations. A treaty may also be known as an agreement, protocol, covenant, convention or exchange of letters, among other terms...
and conventions. Hence, whether a supranational court or tribunal will have jurisdiction and, if so, over what subject matter and over what period of time, will be decided by the sovereign government
Government
Government refers to the legislators, administrators, and arbitrators in the administrative bureaucracy who control a state at a given time, and to the system of government by which they are organized...
of the day.
Extraterritorial jurisdiction
Because each government is supreme, it can enact whatever statuteStatute
A statute is a formal written enactment of a legislative authority that governs a state, city, or county. Typically, statutes command or prohibit something, or declare policy. The word is often used to distinguish law made by legislative bodies from case law, decided by courts, and regulations...
s it wishes. Thus, State A would have the power to make a law which, for example, made it an offence to smoke in the streets of State B, a neighbouring state. State A could employ officers and equip them with cameras. These officers could then collect evidence in State B and, when its citizens returned home, State A could prosecute them for breach of the law. But State A's law could not be directly effective
Direct effect
Direct effect is the principle of European Union law according to which provisions of Union law may, if appropriately framed, confer rights and impose obligations on individuals which the courts of European Union member states are bound to recognise and enforce...
in State B because that would make State B less than sovereign. Similarly, State A could not seek the extradition
Extradition
Extradition is the official process whereby one nation or state surrenders a suspected or convicted criminal to another nation or state. Between nation states, extradition is regulated by treaties...
of its own citizens from State B unless State B was formally to consent (usually through the negotiation of a treaty including the particular offence).
International crime
Transborder crimes take place in more than one state. For example, a defendant may fire a gun, post a package, or write or speak words in State A, but the effects of each action are felt in State B. Some states claim a public policyPublic policy (law)
In private international law, the public policy doctrine or ordre public concerns the body of principles that underpin the operation of legal systems in each state. This addresses the social, moral and economic values that tie a society together: values that vary in different cultures and change...
justification to exercise jurisdiction over crimes committed by, or crimes committed against their citizens, even though these crimes are committed outside their borders. Thus, one of the classifications of crime is "crimes against the state". These are crimes that affect the interests of the state or its administration. In extreme cases, a state may wish to prosecute one of its own citizens for treason
Treason
In law, treason is the crime that covers some of the more extreme acts against one's sovereign or nation. Historically, treason also covered the murder of specific social superiors, such as the murder of a husband by his wife. Treason against the king was known as high treason and treason against a...
even though all the relevant acts and omissions took place in another state. Similarly, if a citizen of State A is acting in a way that interferes with the friendly relations between State A and State B, it may be expedient to prosecute this citizen no matter where the relevant acts have been committed. Jurisdiction may also be claimed over crimes on board the ship
Ship
Since the end of the age of sail a ship has been any large buoyant marine vessel. Ships are generally distinguished from boats based on size and cargo or passenger capacity. Ships are used on lakes, seas, and rivers for a variety of activities, such as the transport of people or goods, fishing,...
s and aircraft
Aircraft
An aircraft is a vehicle that is able to fly by gaining support from the air, or, in general, the atmosphere of a planet. An aircraft counters the force of gravity by using either static lift or by using the dynamic lift of an airfoil, or in a few cases the downward thrust from jet engines.Although...
operated by corporation
Corporation
A corporation is created under the laws of a state as a separate legal entity that has privileges and liabilities that are distinct from those of its members. There are many different forms of corporations, most of which are used to conduct business. Early corporations were established by charter...
s based in the given state, no matter where these craft may be located at the relevant time. In English law
English law
English law is the legal system of England and Wales, and is the basis of common law legal systems used in most Commonwealth countries and the United States except Louisiana...
, where murder
Murder
Murder is the unlawful killing, with malice aforethought, of another human being, and generally this state of mind distinguishes murder from other forms of unlawful homicide...
and manslaughter
Manslaughter
Manslaughter is a legal term for the killing of a human being, in a manner considered by law as less culpable than murder. The distinction between murder and manslaughter is said to have first been made by the Ancient Athenian lawmaker Dracon in the 7th century BC.The law generally differentiates...
are concerned, the English court has jurisdiction over offences committed abroad, if it was committed by a British citizen (see section 9 of the Offences against the Person Act 1861
Offences Against The Person Act 1861
The Offences against the Person Act 1861 is an Act of the Parliament of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland. It consolidated provisions related to offences against the person from a number of earlier statutes into a single Act...
and section 3 of the British Nationality Act 1948
British Nationality Act 1948
The British Nationality Act 1948 was an Act of the Parliament of the United Kingdom that created the status of "Citizen of the United Kingdom and Colonies" as the national citizenship of the United Kingdom and its colonies....
). In R v Cheong (2006) AER (D) 385 the appellant was living in Guyana in 1983. He shot and killed a man who had just robbed his wife and sister-in-law. Under local law he was charged only with the unlicensed possession of a firearm; but as a British citizen, section 9 of the 1861 Act applied when he returned to England and he was charged with murder. On appeal, a conviction for manslaughter was upheld. At a level of conventional policy, there are two main theories to justify the exercise of jurisdiction:
The initiatory or subjective theory
The state in which the sequence of events begins, claims jurisdiction because the accused did everything in his or her power to commit the offence within its territory. Intending to deceive Y into parting with money, X writes a begging letter claiming to be a penniless widow with ten starving children and posts it in State A. X must then rely on the postal workers to carry the letter to Y in State B. No matter how hard X tries, X cannot take any further action to promote the scheme, and whether it succeeds or fails is entirely outside his or her ability to control. There are three theoretical issues to consider:- the definition of the actus reus elements of the crime must be wide enough to include a continuing sequence of events. Some offences are either frozen in time or geography because they are defined either as activities being undertaken when the harm occurs (e.g. driving offences), or in terms of their consequences. For example, the definition of a "deception" is some form of dishonest representation that induces the victim to do or refrain from doing something that causes him or her loss. Anything else is preparatory or anticipatory to this key intellectual event. Thus, to facilitate a prosecution of X, the definition of the offence in State A must include writing and posting the letter in State A as well as the operation of the letter upon the mind of the recipient in the State B.
- State A would be prosecuting conduct occurring within its borders that does not constitute the complete actus reus, i.e. unless and until the letter is read by the recipient, the deception cannot operate or fail. The alternative would be to consider X's actions of writing and posting the letter as preparatory acts and so an attemptAttemptAttempt was originally an offence under the common law of England.Attempt crimes are crimes where the defendant's actions have the form of the actual enaction of the crime itself: the actions must go beyond mere preparation....
. This would be sensible if the letter fails to convince Y, but a nonsense if the letter actually induces Y into sending a cheque back to X. - the policy that caused State A to criminalise the given actus reus must justify a prosecution even though no actual injury or damage has been sustained to a person resident within the territory of State A. The usual justification for criminalising any set of acts or omissions is as a deterrent to protect local citizens. It is not usually the policy of State A to protect the citizens of State B from harm: that duty arises out of the social contractSocial contractThe social contract is an intellectual device intended to explain the appropriate relationship between individuals and their governments. Social contract arguments assert that individuals unite into political societies by a process of mutual consent, agreeing to abide by common rules and accept...
between State B and its own citizens.
In English law, see the definition of a deception which must be the operative cause of the "obtaining" in the deception offences and under the Theft Act 1978
Theft Act 1978
The Theft Act 1978 is an Act of the Parliament of the United Kingdom. It supplemented the earlier deception offences contained in sections 15 and 16 of the Theft Act 1968 by reforming some aspects of those offences and adding new provisions...
, and note that all the inchoate offences
Inchoate offense
An inchoate offense, inchoate offence, or inchoate crime is the crime of preparing for or seeking to commit another crime. The most common example of an inchoate offense is conspiracy...
s move in time and across borders so that an attempt continues from the proximate act until failure, a conspiracy
Conspiracy (crime)
In the criminal law, a conspiracy is an agreement between two or more persons to break the law at some time in the future, and, in some cases, with at least one overt act in furtherance of that agreement...
agreement is not limited to a particular place, and the encouragement by a secondary party as an accessory
Accessory (legal term)
An accessory is a person who assists in the commission of a crime, but who does not actually participate in the commission of the crime as a joint principal...
continues until the principal commits the substantive offence.
The terminatory or objective theory
If the injury or damage affects a citizen within the territory of a state, it would be usual for that state to claim jurisdiction to protect the interests of those who are present within its borders. But X would not have taken any action within State B's borders, so the wording of the actus reus must permit a prosecution in this situation. The theoretical justification for this jurisdiction may be that X has intended to cause the loss or injury and so should not escape liability through the device of only seeking to deceive those resident outside State A (a strategy that would be very simple given the internetInternet
The Internet is a global system of interconnected computer networks that use the standard Internet protocol suite to serve billions of users worldwide...
). The justification is less clear when the place of injury is an accident. Within a single state, the doctrine of transferred intent
Transferred intent
Transferred intent describes the fact that intent can be transferred between victims, between torts, or both. In tort law, there are generally five areas in which transferred intent is applicable: battery, assault, false imprisonment, trespass to land, and trespass to chattels...
would apply to criminalise accidental departures from a planned attack, but if X's letter is redirected out of State A by one of Y's helpful relatives, the receipt of the letter by Y on holiday in State B is entirely outside X's actual intention (just it might be irrelevant to a sender where the recipient of an e-mail
E-mail
Electronic mail, commonly known as email or e-mail, is a method of exchanging digital messages from an author to one or more recipients. Modern email operates across the Internet or other computer networks. Some early email systems required that the author and the recipient both be online at the...
is resident). Alternatively, suppose that X physically attacks Y in State A, intending to kill him. Both are nationals
Nationality
Nationality is membership of a nation or sovereign state, usually determined by their citizenship, but sometimes by ethnicity or place of residence, or based on their sense of national identity....
of State A. Y is seriously injured and, because the hospitals in State B have a superior track record for treating injuries of this type, Y arranges to be transferred to State B where he later dies. Again, there is no causal connection between X's initial criminal acts and the territory of State B, and seeking to found jurisdiction simply on the ground that Y died within its borders, is not wholly convincing given that Y is not a national of State B and so neither owes allegiance
Allegiance
An allegiance is a duty of fidelity said to be owed by a subject or a citizen to his/her state or sovereign.-Etymology:From Middle English ligeaunce . The al- prefix was probably added through confusion with another legal term, allegeance, an "allegation"...
nor is owed any duty of protection as a part of State B's social contract.
In the United States
The United StatesUnited States
The United States of America is a federal constitutional republic comprising fifty states and a federal district...
is a federation of sovereign states. The U.S. Constitution creates a federal government and legislature which has general powers over the territory of the whole and over foreign policy, whereas the individual states have their own governments that, within the scope allowed by the federal constitution, have local territorial jurisdiction. There is a system of federal courts
United States federal courts
The United States federal courts make up the judiciary branch of federal government of the United States organized under the United States Constitution and laws of the federal government.-Categories:...
which have jurisdiction to hear charges alleging federal crimes, and state courts have jurisdiction to hear charges alleging violations of local state law.
U.S. federal courts
For a federal court to have jurisdiction, the crime to be prosecuted must either have been created pursuant to an express or implied constitutional grant of authority, or must have been committed in an area owned by or under the exclusive control of the federal government. Examples of crimes that are based on constitutional grants of authority include tax evasionTax evasion
Tax evasion is the general term for efforts by individuals, corporations, trusts and other entities to evade taxes by illegal means. Tax evasion usually entails taxpayers deliberately misrepresenting or concealing the true state of their affairs to the tax authorities to reduce their tax liability,...
(implied from the Article I grant of taxing power from the Taxing and Spending Clause
Taxing and Spending Clause
Article I, Section 8, Clause 1 of the United States Constitution, is known as the Taxing and Spending Clause. It is the clause that gives the federal government of the United States its power of taxation...
and the Sixteenth Amendment
Sixteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution
The Sixteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution allows the Congress to levy an income tax without apportioning it among the states or basing it on Census results...
); possessing illegal substances (under the Commerce Clause
Commerce Clause
The Commerce Clause is an enumerated power listed in the United States Constitution . The clause states that the United States Congress shall have power "To regulate Commerce with foreign Nations, and among the several States, and with the Indian Tribes." Courts and commentators have tended to...
); infringement of patents (Article I, § 8); and conspiring to violate civil rights
Civil rights
Civil and political rights are a class of rights that protect individuals' freedom from unwarranted infringement by governments and private organizations, and ensure one's ability to participate in the civil and political life of the state without discrimination or repression.Civil rights include...
(under the Fourteenth Amendment). Courts have given a particularly broad interpretation to the Commerce Clause power, permitting Congress to make a federal crime of many common law crimes such as kidnapping or murder if state lines are crossed during commission of the crime, and such as embezzlement and blackmail using instrumentalities of commerce such as telephone lines or the U.S. mail.
Examples of crimes that are based on areas owned by or under the exclusive control of the federal government include crimes committed in the District of Columbia, in U.S. Territories
United States territory
United States territory is any extent of region under the jurisdiction of the federal government of the United States, including all waters including all U.S. Naval carriers. The United States has traditionally proclaimed the sovereign rights for exploring, exploiting, conserving, and managing its...
, in U.S. National Parks, in federal courthouses
United States federal courts
The United States federal courts make up the judiciary branch of federal government of the United States organized under the United States Constitution and laws of the federal government.-Categories:...
and federal prison
Federal prison
Federal prisons are run by national governments in countries where subdivisions of the country also operate prisons.In the United States federal prisons are operated by the Federal Bureau of Prisons. In Canada the Correctional Service of Canada operates federal prisons. Prison sentences in these...
s, and aboard airplanes (regulated by the Federal Aviation Administration
Federal Aviation Administration
The Federal Aviation Administration is the national aviation authority of the United States. An agency of the United States Department of Transportation, it has authority to regulate and oversee all aspects of civil aviation in the U.S...
) and ocean-going vessels. The United States military has its own criminal justice system applicable to its members, but civilians may be charged with a federal crime for acts committed on military bases. Federal courts can also assert jurisdiction to hear cases brought against U.S. citizens based on their illegal activities in other countries.
The Sixth Amendment calls for trial “by an impartial jury of the State and district wherein the crime shall have been committed.” Within the federal court system, Rule 18 of the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure
Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure
The Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure are the procedural rules that govern how federal criminal prosecutions are conducted in United States district courts, the general trial courts of the U.S. government. As such, they are the companion to the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure...
specifies which federal court may hear a particular criminal case:
- Unless a statute or these rules permit otherwise, the government must prosecute an offense in a district where the offense was committed. The court must set the place of trial within the district with due regard for the convenience of the defendant and the witnesses, and the prompt administration of justice.
Anderson, 328 U.S., at 703 holds: “[T]he locus delicti must be determined from the nature of the crime alleged and the location of the act or acts constituting it.” In Hyde v. United States, 225 U.S. 347 (1912) although none of the defendants had entered the District of Columbia as part of their conspiracy to defraud the United States, they were convicted because one co-conspirator had committed overt acts in Columbia (225 U.S., at 363). So conspiracy is a continuing offense committed in all the districts where a co-conspirator acts on the agreement. Similarly, In re Palliser, 136 U.S. 257 (1890) the sending of letters from New York to postmasters in Connecticut in an attempt to gain postage on credit, made Connecticut, where the mail he addressed and dispatched was received, an appropriate venue (136 U.S., at 266—268). See 18 U.S.C. § 3237(a):
- Any offense involving the use of the mails … is a continuing offense and … may be … prosecuted in any district from, through, or into which such … mail matter … moves.
This was applied in United States v. Johnson, 323 U.S. 273, 275 (1944) so that “an illegal use of the mails … may subject the user to prosecution in the district where he sent the goods, or in the district of their arrival, or in any intervening district.”
Problems
This system works well when there is a clear line of demarcation between the two state jurisdictions, or between a state and federal jurisdictions, and prosecutions may be initiated in the appropriate court. But laws and rules are not always so clear.Concurrent jurisdiction
Some crimes have national significance and, to reflect the public interest, their investigation and prosecution will fall to the Federal Bureau of InvestigationFederal Bureau of Investigation
The Federal Bureau of Investigation is an agency of the United States Department of Justice that serves as both a federal criminal investigative body and an internal intelligence agency . The FBI has investigative jurisdiction over violations of more than 200 categories of federal crime...
and/or the Department of Justice
United States Department of Justice
The United States Department of Justice , is the United States federal executive department responsible for the enforcement of the law and administration of justice, equivalent to the justice or interior ministries of other countries.The Department is led by the Attorney General, who is nominated...
. This creates tensions between the two systems because the individual states in which aspects of the criminal activity have taken place may wish to assert jurisdiction over that part, whereas the federal authorities will wish to consolidate the wrongdoing across several states into a single trial
Trial (law)
In law, a trial is when parties to a dispute come together to present information in a tribunal, a formal setting with the authority to adjudicate claims or disputes. One form of tribunal is a court...
.
One significant result of the concurrent jurisdiction
Concurrent jurisdiction
Concurrent jurisdiction exists where two or more courts from different systems simultaneously have jurisdiction over a specific case. This situation leads to forum shopping, as parties will try to have their civil or criminal case heard in the court that they perceive will be most favorable to...
between state and federal courts (and in some cases between different state courts) is that an individual who violates both state and federal law, or the laws of multiple states, can be separately charged and tried in each jurisdiction. Thus, a resident of Virginia
Virginia
The Commonwealth of Virginia , is a U.S. state on the Atlantic Coast of the Southern United States. Virginia is nicknamed the "Old Dominion" and sometimes the "Mother of Presidents" after the eight U.S. presidents born there...
who defrauds a Florida
Florida
Florida is a state in the southeastern United States, located on the nation's Atlantic and Gulf coasts. It is bordered to the west by the Gulf of Mexico, to the north by Alabama and Georgia and to the east by the Atlantic Ocean. With a population of 18,801,310 as measured by the 2010 census, it...
resident through the mail may be tried in Virginia state court and in a Florida state court, and in a federal court in either Florida or Virginia. A famous example of dual state and federal sovereignty is the Rodney King
Rodney King
Rodney Glen King is an American best known for his involvement in a police brutality case involving the Los Angeles Police Department on March 3, 1991...
case. Police officers who beat motorist Rodney King were acquitted of assault charges in the California
California
California is a state located on the West Coast of the United States. It is by far the most populous U.S. state, and the third-largest by land area...
state court, but were convicted of violating King's civil rights - based on the same events - in a federal court in California.