Conviction in the context of "Collateral consequences of criminal charges"

⭐ In the context of collateral_consequences_of_criminal_charges, conviction is considered the trigger for…

Ad spacer

⭐ Core Definition: Conviction

In law, a conviction is the determination by a court of law that a defendant is guilty of a crime. A conviction may follow a guilty plea that is accepted by the court, a jury trial in which a verdict of guilty is delivered, or a trial by judge in which the defendant is found guilty.

The opposite of a conviction is an acquittal (that is, "not guilty"). In Scotland, there can also be a verdict of "not proven", which is considered an acquittal. Sometimes, despite a defendant being found guilty, the court may order that the defendant not be convicted. This is known as a discharge and is used in countries including England, Wales, Canada, Australia, and New Zealand.

↓ Menu

>>>PUT SHARE BUTTONS HERE<<<

👉 Conviction in the context of Collateral consequences of criminal charges

Collateral consequences of criminal conviction are the additional civil state penalties, mandated by statute, that attach to a criminal conviction. They are not part of the direct consequences of criminal conviction, such as prison, fines, or probation. They are the further civil actions by the state that are triggered as a consequence of the conviction.

In some jurisdictions, a judge, finding a defendant guilty of a crime, can order that no conviction be recorded, thereby relieving the person of the collateral consequences of a criminal conviction.

↓ Explore More Topics
In this Dossier

Conviction in the context of Sentence (law)

In criminal law, a sentence is the punishment for a crime ordered by a trial court after conviction in a criminal procedure, normally at the conclusion of a trial. A sentence may consist of imprisonment, a fine, or other sanctions. Sentences for multiple crimes may be a concurrent sentence, where sentences of imprisonment are all served together at the same time, or a consecutive sentence, in which the period of imprisonment is the sum of all sentences served one after the other. Additional sentences include intermediate, which allows an inmate to be free for about 8 hours a day for work purposes; determinate, which is fixed on a number of days, months, or years; and indeterminate or bifurcated, which mandates the minimum period be served in an institutional setting such as a prison followed by street time period of parole, supervised release or probation until the total sentence is completed.

If a sentence is reduced to a less harsh punishment, then the sentence is said to have been mitigated or commuted. Rarely, depending on circumstances, murder charges are mitigated and reduced to manslaughter charges. However, in certain legal systems, a defendant may be punished beyond the terms of the sentence, through phenomena including social stigma, loss of governmental benefits, or collectively, the collateral consequences of criminal charges.

↑ Return to Menu

Conviction in the context of Corrections

In criminal justice, particularly in North America, correction, corrections, and correctional, are umbrella terms describing a variety of functions typically carried out by government agencies, and involving the punishment, treatment, and supervision of persons who have been convicted of crimes. These functions commonly include imprisonment, parole, and probation. A typical correctional institution is a prison. A correctional system, also known as a penal system, thus refers to a network of agencies that administer a jurisdiction's prisons, and community-based programs like parole, and probation boards. This system is part of the larger criminal justice system, which additionally includes police, prosecution and courts.

"Corrections" is also the name of a field of academic study concerned with the theories, policies, and programs pertaining to the practice of corrections. Its object of study includes personnel training and management as well as the experiences of those on the other side of the fence — the unwilling subjects of the correctional process. Stohr and colleagues (2008) write that "Earlier scholars were more honest, calling what we now call corrections by the name penology, which means the study of punishment for crime."

↑ Return to Menu

Conviction in the context of Plea

In law, a plea is a defendant's response to a criminal charge. A defendant may plead guilty or not guilty. Depending on jurisdiction, additional pleas may be available, including nolo contendere (no contest), no case to answer (in the United Kingdom), or an Alford plea (in the United States).

Under common law systems, a defendant who pleads guilty will be convicted if the court accepts the plea. The court will then determine and impose a sentence. Plea bargaining involves discussions between the prosecutor and defendants to reach an agreement for a guilty plea in exchange for a more lenient punishment.

↑ Return to Menu

Conviction in the context of Not proven

Not proven (Scots: No pruiven, Scottish Gaelic: gun dearbhadh) is a verdict available to a court of law in Scotland. Under Scots law, a criminal trial may end in one of three verdicts, one of conviction ("guilty") and two of acquittal ("not proven" and "not guilty").

Between the Restoration in the late 17th century and the early 18th century, jurors in Scotland were expected only to find whether individual factual allegations were proven or not proven, rather than to rule on an accused's guilt. In 1728, the jury in a murder trial asserted "its ancient right" to declare a defendant "not guilty". Over time, the "not guilty" verdict regained wide acceptance and use amongst Scots juries, with the encouragement of defence lawyers. It eventually displaced "not proven" as the primary verdict of acquittal. Nowadays, juries can return a verdict of either "not guilty" or "not proven", with the same legal effect of acquittal.

↑ Return to Menu

Conviction in the context of Commutation of sentence

In law, a commutation is the substitution of a lesser penalty for that given after a conviction for a crime. The penalty can be lessened in severity, in duration, or both. Unlike most pardons by government and overturning by the court (a full overturning is equal to an acquittal), a commutation does not affect the status of a defendant's underlying criminal conviction.

Although the concept of commutation may be used to broadly describe the substitution of a lesser criminal penalty for the original sentence, some jurisdictions have historically used the term only for the substitution of a sentence of a different character from what was originally imposed by the court. For example, the substitution of a sentence of parole for the original sentence of incarceration. A jurisdiction that uses that definition of commutation would use another term, such as a remission, to describe a reduction of a penalty that does not change its character.

↑ Return to Menu

Conviction in the context of Fundamental Constitutions of Carolina

The Fundamental Constitutions of Carolina were adopted on March 1, 1669 by the eight Lords Proprietors of the Province of Carolina, which included most of the land between what is now Virginia and Florida. It replaced the Charter of Carolina and the Concessions and Agreements of the Lords Proprietors of the Province of Carolina (1665). The date March 1, 1669, was the date that proprietors confirmed the Constitutions and sent them to the Colony, but later on two other versions were introduced in 1682 and in 1698. Moreover, the proprietors suspended the Constitutions in 1690. Despite the claims of proprietors on the valid version of the Constitution, the colonists officially recognized the July 21, 1669, version, claiming that six proprietors had sealed the Constitutions as "the unalterable form and rule of Government forever" on that date. The earliest draft of this version in manuscript is believed to be the one found at Columbia, South Carolina archives.

The Constitutions were "reactionary" and "experimented with a non-common law system designed to encourage a feudal social structure", including through the use of non-unanimous jury decisions for criminal convictions. Some scholars think that the Colonists, settlers, and the British Crown kept themselves at a distance to the Constitutions from the beginning; however, others argue that it was a legal document that drew on the King's earlier charter to the colony and reflected crucial legal realities. While the provisions of the Fundamental Constitutions were never fully employed nor ratified, the Constitutions did help to shape power in the Carolinas and especially land distribution. Colonists' main concerns over the document were its exaltation of proprietors as noblemen at the apex of the hierarchically designed society. Second, the Constitutions had rules that were hard to implement by settlers for practical reasons. Thus, the proprietors had to amend the rules five times. They were repealed in part after the revolution against James II—the Glorious Revolution—which also reflected a partial reaction against such principles; however, for eight proprietors and the king who were the authors of the "Fundamental Constitutions", it reflected the proper order of governance, or as they wrote, they were creating a government with lords so "that the government of this province may be made most agreeable to the monarchy under which we live and of which this province is a part; and that we may avoid erecting a numerous democracy."

↑ Return to Menu

Conviction in the context of Puerto Rico governmental line of succession

The Puerto Rico gubernatorial line of succession defines who may become or act as Governor of Puerto Rico upon the incapacity, death, resignation, or removal from office, by impeachment and subsequent conviction, of an incumbent governor or a governor-elect.

Article IV of the Constitution of Puerto Rico establishes that when a vacancy occurs in the post of Governor said post shall devolve upon the Secretary of State, who shall hold it for the rest of the term and until a new governor has been elected and qualifies. In the event that vacancies exist at the same time in both the post of Governor and that of Secretary of State, the law establishes a line of succession upon the Secretaries. This line of succession is established by Law No. 7 of 2005.

↑ Return to Menu

Conviction in the context of High Court of Justiciary

The High Court of Justiciary (Scottish Gaelic: Àrd-chùirt a' Cheartais) is the supreme criminal court in Scotland. The High Court is both a trial court and a court of appeal. As a trial court, the High Court sits on circuit at Parliament House or in the adjacent Justiciary Building (the former Sheriff Court building) in the Old Town in Edinburgh, or in dedicated buildings in Glasgow and Aberdeen. The High Court sometimes sits in various smaller towns in Scotland, where it uses the local sheriff court building. As an appeal court, the High Court sits only in Edinburgh. On one occasion the High Court of Justiciary sat outside Scotland, at Zeist in the Netherlands during the Pan Am Flight 103 bombing trial, as the Scottish Court in the Netherlands. At Zeist the High Court sat both as a trial court, and an appeal court for the initial appeal by Abdelbaset al-Megrahi.

The president of the High Court is the Lord Justice General, who holds office ex officio by virtue of being Lord President of the Court of Session, and his depute is the Lord Justice Clerk. The remaining judges are the Lords Commissioners of Justiciary, who hold office ex officio by virtue of being appointed as Senators of the College of Justice and judges of the Court of Session. As a court of first instance trials are usually heard with a jury of 15 and a single Lord Commissioner of Justiciary; the jury can convict on a majority verdict. In some cases, such as the trial of Abdelbaset al-Megrahi and Lamin Khalifah Fhimah for the bombing of Pan Am Flight 103, a trial can be heard by a bench of judges alone; sitting without a jury. As an appeal court the hearings are always without a jury, with two judges sitting to hear an appeal against sentence, and three judges sit to hear an appeal against conviction.

↑ Return to Menu