Question for the legal minds: Jurisdiction

[Pizzapinochle]

State vs. Federal convictions

I am looking at a couple documents:

http://www.ussc.gov/Research_and_St...2013/FY12_Overview_Federal_Criminal_Cases.pdf

and

http://bjs.gov/content/pub/pdf/FFRO.PDF

I am trying to figure out if federal convictions have any real connection to general trends in crime, specifically relating to firearms..

So, for example, one statement is this:

"Firearms crimes were 9.8 percent of the total federal criminal
convictions for fiscal year 2012. Of the 8,105 firearms cases
reported to the Commission, 23.2 percent (1,884) involved the
possession or use of a firearm in connection with a crime of
violence or drug trafficking crime. More than half of the cases
(4,190) involved a convicted felon who illegally possessed a
firearm."

There are some interesting facts in there, but it is talking about a very small number of cases (8,105) relative to crime nationwide. Less than 2,000 of those involved violent crime, which there are obviously a lot more violent crimes committed nationwide with firearms (something like 300,000).

Questions:

Why would those particular 8,105 cases have been tried in Federal court? What types of firearm cases end up in Federal court instead of State courts?

Specifically, why would those 1,884 violent/drug cases make their way to federal court out of the hundreds of thousands of violent firearm crimes?

Do trends in federal convictions mirror trends in the general criminal population?

For example: This passage says that more than half the firearm cases involved a felon with a previous conviction who was illegally possessing a firearm. Would it be accurate to say that nationwide, more than half the crimes committed with a gun likely involve a felon in illegal possession? Or, are federal convictions sufficiently unique that they probably don't reflect general trends?

Thanks for the help.

 

[Frank Ettin]

...Why would those particular 8,105 cases have been tried in Federal court? What types of firearm cases end up in Federal court instead of State courts?

Specifically, why would those 1,884 violent/drug cases make their way to federal court out of the hundreds of thousands of violent firearm crimes?...

It's actually fairly simple.

1. Alleged violations of federal criminal statutes are tried in federal court. Alleged violations of state criminal laws are tried in state court.
   
   
2. There is one federal government. There are 50 States.
   
   
3. The federal government has no general police power:

   The inherent authority of a government to impose restrictions on private rights for the sake of public welfare, order, and security.

   
   
   • Congress may only enact laws, including laws imposing criminal liability, as specifically authorized by the Constitution. See the Tenth Amendment:

     The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the states, are reserved to the states respectively, or to the people.

     
     
   • So there is no general federal law against robbery. However, there is, for example, a specific federal laws against robbing a financial institution insured by the federal government (i. e., banks). But the common robbery of a convenience store is not a federal crime.
     
     
   • There is no general federal law against murder. However, murder of a federal officer is a federal crime.
     
     
   • There are other sorts of examples, but in general federal criminal laws are narrow.
   
   
4. In contrast, States have general police powers, and most garden variety crimes will be violations of state law, but not federal law.

 

[gc70]

Frank, you have described circumstances in which the targets of a crime are federal in nature and the federal government would either have sole jurisdiction or would have a special interest in exercising primary jurisdiction.

What about circumstances in which federal and state laws overlap nearly totally (i.e. felon in possession of a firearm) and there is no special federal nexus to the crime?

 

[Frank Ettin]

What about circumstances in which federal and state laws overlap nearly totally (i.e. felon in possession of a firearm) and there is no special federal nexus to the crime?

There are going to be situations in which there are both state and federal crimes which could be charged. In such cases, a local prosecutor and the U. S. Attorney might work out how to deal with the situation. I don't think there's anything automatic or preordained.

So someone with past felony convictions holds up a market and he uses a gun. Now there's the state crime of robbery and the federal crime of a felon having possession of a gun. The State can certainly efficiently prosecute the robbery, and state law might provide for a separate crime or a sentence enhancement related to the use of the gun. The U. S. Attorney might easily conclude that there's no reason to also drag the guy into federal court to be prosecuted for the felon in possession crime.

Sometimes when particular acts violate both state and federal laws, the federal government will let the state try the matter first, and then, depending on the outcome, either let the matter go or pursue the federal charges.

That happened in the Rodney King beating case. The officers involved were acquitted in state court, so the federal government pursued its charges resulting in conviction of two of the four officers (and no, that didn't violate double jeopardy).

 

[Pizzapinochle]

Is there an easy list of federal crimes?

Just trying to figure out what types of crimes are represented in that report.

Sounds like robbery and murder would be uncommon.

Does that mean most of those firearm convictions are probably dealing in firearms and/or illegal possession charges more than assault, robbery, rape, etc.?

 

[Frank Ettin]

Is there an easy list of federal crimes?

It's not an "easy list", but in general federal criminal statutes will be found in Title 18 of the United States Code.

 

[Black Knight]

Some prosecutors want to transfer state cases such as armed drug offender cases to the federal system because the federal systems usually have more severe punishments. Some crimes are both state and federal such as bank robbery and a good many drug offenses. This means that both can prosecute for the same crime but usually the state will pass it to the federal system. Also with the federal system they can send the convicted to a facility that could be out of state if the Judge wishes.