According to the text, crime has been part of the human condition since people began to live in groups. Ancient documents indicate that conduct we now call murder, theft, or robbery was identified as criminal by civilizations that existed thousands of years ago. Criminal laws regulate human conduct and tell people what they can and cannot do and, in some instances, what they must do under certain circumstances. In this assignment, you will explore different types of criminal conduct and the goals of criminal law. Write a four to six (4-6) page paper in which you: Determine whether or not a conviction is feasible when an alleged perpetrator does not have the required mens rea but has engaged in the actus rea. Provide a rationale to support your position. Explain the distinction between diplomatic immunity and legislative immunity. Next, support or criticize the premise that diplomatic immunity is vital for Americans abroad. Argue for or against the theory that the courts should not hold a defendant of questionable competency to the standard sentencing guidelines. Provide a rationale to support your response. Identify the four (4) goals of criminal law, and discuss the manner in which these four (4) goals effectuate the purpose of protecting the public and preventing the conviction of innocent persons. Use at least three (3) quality academic resources in this assignment.  Note:  Wikipedia and similar type Websites do not qualify as academic resources. Points: 140 Assignment 1: Criminal Conduct and Criminal Law Criteria Unacceptable Below 60% F Meets Minimum Expectations 60-69% D Fair 70-79% C Proficient 80-89% B Exemplary 90-100% A 1. Determine whether or not a conviction is feasible when an alleged perpetrator does not have the required mens rea but has engaged in the actus rea. Provide a rationale to support your position. Weight: 25% Did not submit or incompletely determined whether or not a conviction is feasible when an alleged perpetrator does not have the required mens rea but has engaged in the actus rea. Did not submit or incompletely provided a rationale to support your position. Insufficiently determined whether or not a conviction is feasible when an alleged perpetrator does not have the required mens rea but has engaged in the actus rea. Insufficiently provided a rationale to support your position. Partially determined whether or not a conviction is feasible when an alleged perpetrator does not have the required mens rea but has engaged in the actus rea. Partially provided a rationale to support your position. Satisfactorily determined whether or not a conviction is feasible when an alleged perpetrator does not have the required mens rea but has engaged in the actus rea. Satisfactorily provided a rationale to support your position. Thoroughly determined whether or not a conviction is feasible when an alleged perpetrator does not have the required mens rea but has engaged in the actus rea. Thoroughly provided a rationale to sup.

1. According to the text, crime has been part of the human
condition since people began to live in groups. Ancient
documents indicate that conduct we now call murder, theft, or
robbery was identified as criminal by civilizations that existed
thousands of years ago. Criminal laws regulate human conduct
and tell people what they can and cannot do and, in some
instances, what they must do under certain circumstances. In
this assignment, you will explore different types of criminal
conduct and the goals of criminal law.
Write a four to six (4-6) page paper in which you:
Determine whether or not a conviction is feasible when an
alleged perpetrator does not have the required mens rea but has
engaged in the actus rea. Provide a rationale to support your
position.
Explain the distinction between diplomatic immunity and
legislative immunity. Next, support or criticize the premise that
diplomatic immunity is vital for Americans abroad.
Argue for or against the theory that the courts should not hold a
defendant of questionable competency to the standard
sentencing guidelines. Provide a rationale to support your
response.
Identify the four (4) goals of criminal law, and discuss the
manner in which these four (4) goals effectuate the purpose of
protecting the public and preventing the conviction of innocent
persons.
Use at least three (3) quality academic resources in this
assignment.
Note:
Wikipedia and similar type Websites do not qualify as
academic resources.
Points: 140
Assignment 1: Criminal Conduct and Criminal Law
Criteria

2. Unacceptable
Below 60% F
Meets Minimum Expectations
60-69% D
Fair
70-79% C
Proficient
80-89% B
Exemplary
90-100% A
1. Determine whether or not a conviction is feasible when an
alleged perpetrator does not have the required mens rea but has
engaged in the actus rea. Provide a rationale to support your
position.
Weight: 25%
Did not submit or incompletely determined whether or not a
conviction is feasible when an alleged perpetrator does not have
the required mens rea but has engaged in the actus rea. Did not
submit or incompletely provided a rationale to support your
position.
Insufficiently determined whether or not a conviction is feasible
when an alleged perpetrator does not have the required mens rea
but has engaged in the actus rea. Insufficiently provided a
rationale to support your position.
Partially determined whether or not a conviction is feasible
when an alleged perpetrator does not have the required mens rea
but has engaged in the actus rea. Partially provided a rationale
to support your position.
Satisfactorily determined whether or not a conviction is feasible
when an alleged perpetrator does not have the required mens rea
but has engaged in the actus rea. Satisfactorily provided a
rationale to support your position.
Thoroughly determined whether or not a conviction is feasible

3. when an alleged perpetrator does not have the required mens rea
but has engaged in the actus rea. Thoroughly provided a
rationale to support your position.
2. Explain the distinction between diplomatic immunity and
legislative immunity. Next, support or criticize the premise that
diplomatic immunity is vital for Americans abroad.
Weight: 20%
Did not submit or incompletely explained the distinction
between diplomatic immunity and legislative immunity. Did not
submit or incompletely supported or criticized the premise that
diplomatic immunity is vital for Americans abroad.
Insufficiently explained the distinction between diplomatic
immunity and legislative immunity. Insufficiently supported or
criticized the premise that diplomatic immunity is vital for
Americans abroad.
Partially explained the distinction between diplomatic immunity
and legislative immunity. Partially supported or criticized the
premise that diplomatic immunity is vital for Americans abroad.
Satisfactorily explained the distinction between diplomatic
immunity and legislative immunity. Satisfactorily supported or
criticized the premise that diplomatic immunity is vital for
Americans abroad.
Thoroughly explained the distinction between diplomatic
immunity and legislative immunity. Thoroughly supported or
criticized the premise that diplomatic immunity is vital for
Americans abroad.
3. Argue for or against the theory that the courts should not
hold a defendant of questionable competency to the standard
sentencing guidelines. Provide a rationale to support your
response.
Weight: 20%
Did not submit or incompletely argued for or against the theory
that the courts should not hold a defendant of questionable
competency to the standard sentencing guidelines. Did not
submit or incompletely provided a rationale to support your
response.

4. Insufficiently argued for or against the theory that the courts
should not hold a defendant of questionable competency to the
standard sentencing guidelines. Insufficiently provided a
rationale to support your response.
Partially argued for or against the theory that the courts should
not hold a defendant of questionable competency to the standard
sentencing guidelines. Partially provided a rationale to support
your response.
Satisfactorily argued for or against the theory that the courts
should not hold a defendant of questionable competency to the
standard sentencing guidelines. Satisfactorily provided a
rationale to support your response.
Thoroughly argued for or against the theory that the courts
should not hold a defendant of questionable competency to the
standard sentencing guidelines. Thoroughly provided a rationale
to support your response.
4. Identify the four (4) goals of criminal law, and discuss the
manner in which these four (4) goals effectuate the purpose of
protecting the public and preventing the conviction of innocent
persons.
Weight: 20%
Did not submit or incompletely identified the four (4) goals of
criminal law, did not submit or incompletely discussed the
manner in which these four (4) goals effectuate the purpose of
protecting the public and preventing the conviction of innocent
persons.
Insufficiently identified the four (4) goals of criminal law,
insufficiently discussed the manner in which these four (4)
goals effectuate the purpose of protecting the public and
preventing the conviction of innocent persons.
Partially identified the four (4) goals of criminal law, partially
discussed the manner in which these four (4) goals effectuate
the purpose of protecting the public and preventing the
conviction of innocent persons.
Satisfactorily identified the four (4) goals of criminal law,
satisfactorily discussed the manner in which these four (4) goals

5. effectuate the purpose of protecting the public and preventing
the conviction of innocent persons.
Thoroughly identified the four (4) goals of criminal law,
thoroughly discussed the manner in which these four (4) goals
effectuate the purpose of protecting the public and preventing
the conviction of innocent persons.
5. 3 references
Weight: 5%
No references provided
Does not meet the required number of references; all references
poor quality choices.
Does not meet the required number of references; some
references poor quality choices.
Meets number of required references; all references high quality
choices.
Exceeds number of required references; all references high
quality choices.
6. Clarity, writing mechanics, and formatting requirements
Weight: 10%
More than 8 errors present
7-8 errors present
5-6 errors present
3-4 errors present
0-2 errors present