Gale Encyclopedia Of American Law 3Rd Edition Volume 1 P39 ppt

pursuing elements of a possible weapons pro- gram and was ignoring demands of suspending production of uranium. Additionally, North Korea had not only withdrawn from the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty but had also tested two nuclear devices. With Washington laying out its largest defense spending in a quarter century, arms control and disarmament were clearly perceived to not be a priority of the Bush administration. Under President BARACK OBAMA, the United States once again changed its focus back toward arms control and non-proliferation. In an April 2009 speech, Obama outlined a number of concrete steps that the United States was planning to take in order to address the threat of nuclear weapons. Specifically, the United States introduced a resolution on nuclear nonproliferation and disarmament during the UNITED NATIONS Security Council meeting chaired by President Obama on September 24, 2009. The Security Council unanimously ap- proved Obama’s resolution, which set forth a series of goals to eliminate nuclear weapons, ban the production of fissile material used to make such weapons, outlaw atomic tests and safeguard stockpiles of weapons. Additionally, the resolution advocated actio ns to be taken against nations that violate the International NUCLEAR NONPROLIFERATION TREATY by having their military use civilian nuclear technology. Oba- ma’s appearance at the United Nations Special Session of the Security Council was the first time any U.S. president had ever presided over a full-scale summit of the Security Council. This action sent a powerful signal to the world that the United States plans to reestablish being a leader on arms control. The United States is also planning on hosting a global nuclear security summit in Washington in April 2010, which will focus on raising the global standard for effective nuclear securit y. FURTHER READINGS Center for Arms Control and Non-Proliferation. 2009. “President Obama Making Good on Nuclear Weapons Promises.” Press Release, September 23, 2009. Available online at http://www.armscontrolcenter.org/audience/ media/092309_obama_good_on_nuclear_promises/ website home page: http://www.armscontrolcenter.org (accessed September 26, 2009). Dunn, Lewis A., and Sharon A. Squassoni. 1993. Arms Control: What Next? Boulder, Colo.: Westview Press. Laird, Melvin R. August 23, 2001. “Why Scrap the ABM Treaty?” Washington Post, A25. Mufson, Steven. December 16, 2001. “ABM Treaty May Be History, But Deterrence Doctrine Lives.” Washington Post, A37. Parsons, Christi. September 25, 2009. “Security Council Backs Abolishing Nuclear Arms.” latimes.com. Available online at http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/ world/la-fg-obama-nuclear25-2009sep25,0,6589404. story website home page: http://www.latimes.com (accessed September 26, 2009). “Project on Strengthening Arms Control and Nonprolifera- tion.” Center for Arms Control and non-Proliferation. Available online at http://www. armscontrolcenter.org/ resources/strengthening_nonproliferation/ websitehome page: http://www.armscontrolcenter.org (accessed S eptem- ber 25, 2009). Sheehan, Michael. 1988. Arms Control: Theory and Practice. Oxford: Blackwell. Varner, Bill. September 25, 2009. “Obama Gets UN Nuclear Accord as U.K., France Put Heat on Iran.” Bloomberg. com. Available online at http://www.bloomberg.com/ apps/news?pid=20601087&sid=aiiuAu6px_Cw website home page: http://bloomberg.com(accessed September 26, 2009). Weisman, Steven R. March 23, 2003. “A Nation at War: A New Doctrine, Pre-emption, Idea with a Lineage whose Time Has Come.” New York Times, 1B. CROSS REFERENCES Anti-Ballistic-Missile Treaty of 1972; Blockade; Hot Line Agreement, 1971; Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces Treaty; International Law; NATO; Nixon, Richard Milhous; Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty; Nuclear Weapons; Terrorism; War. ARRAIGNMENT A criminal proceeding at which the defendant is officially called before a court of compet ent jurisdiction, informed of the offense charged in the complaint, information, indictment, or other charging document, and asked to enter a plea of guilty, not guilty, or as otherwise permitted by law. Depending on the jurisdiction, arraignment may also be the proceeding at which the court determines whether to set bail for the defendant or release the defendant on his or her own recognizance. Although the initial appearance of the arrested person before a magistrate is sometimes referred to as an arraignment, it is not a true arraignment, which only comes after the DEFEN- DANT has been both arrested and formally charged. In all but extremely rare cases, arraign- ment also takes place before any suppression hearings and the trial itself. The interests at issue in an arraignment are the defendant’s right to know of the charges against him or her and the defendant’s right to have adequate information from which to prepare a defense. The state also has an interest in having the defendant make a PLEA so it can prepare accordingly. GALE ENCYCLOPEDIA OF AMERICAN LAW, 3RD E DITION 368 ARRAIGNMENT The SIXTH AMENDMENT to U.S. Constitution guarantees that defendants shall “be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation against them.” But the Sixth Amendment does not guarantee defendants the right to be informed of the charged offense at an arraignment. Although the Supreme Court has ruled that arraignments are a necessary pre-condition to trial under federal law, the Court has also ruled that failure to arraign a defendant is not a reversible error where the failure is inadvertent, the defendant knows that he is the accused, the defendant is apprised of the charged offense, the defendant is able to assist in preparing a defense, and the defendant is not otherwise prejudiced by the lack of an arraignment. Thus the importance and necessity of being arraigned before trial varies from case to case and from jurisdiction to jurisdiction. The law governing arraignment procedures is spelled out by statutes and court rules at both the state and federal levels. The Federal Rules of CRIMINAL PROCEDURE provide that during the arraignment federal courts must read the indictment or information to the defendant or state the substance of the charge to the defendant and ask him or her to enter a plea thereto. FR Crim P, Rule 10. The defendant must also be given a copy of the indictment or information before he or she is called upon to plead. Generally speaking, the federal rules require defendants to be present at the arraignment. However, in prosec utions for offenses punishable by fine or imprisonment for not more than one year, the court, with the written consen t of the defendant, may permit arraignment in the defendant’s absence. The court rules in some states only require that arraignments be held for felony-level charges, but not for misdemeanor-level offenses. Other states require arraignments for felonies, gross misdemeanors, and misdemeanors punishable by INCARCERATION or a fine greater than a certain amount. In addition to requiring that defen- dants be called before the court, informed of the charged offense, and asked to enter a plea, several state jurisdictions also require that defendants be informed of certain constitutional rights during arraignment, including the right to trial by jury, the right to assistance of counsel, and the right against SELF-INCRIMINATION. If the law of a particular state makes the arraignment a critical stage of the prosecution, such as when the court rules require the defendant to raise any defenses to the charged offense at the arraignment or WAIVE them, then the defendant must be afforded the RIGHT TO COUNSEL under the Sixth Amendment (Hamilton v.Alabama, 368U.S. 52,82 S.Ct. 157, 7 L.Ed.2d 114 [U.S.Ala. 1961]). Defendants in both state and federal courts must be arraigned in a timely fashion. Ordinar- ily the accused must be arraigned before the impaneling of the jury or at least before the introduction of evidence. If an unreasonable delay occurs between the time a defendant is arrested and charged with an offense and the time the defendant is arraigned, state and federal courts will dismiss the criminal procee d- ings as having violated the defendant’s Sixth Amendment right to a speedy trial . Many jurisdictions require that defendants be arraigned within seventy-two hours of arrest. As a result, defendants arrested over the weekend are usually arraigned on Mondays, which can make for a packed courtroom. To speed up the arraignment process on busy days, defendants are often arraigned in groups, which is constitutionally permissible so long as each person being arraigned identifies himself or herself to the court and the court advises all defendants in attendance that the remarks of the court apply to each person individually. Courts conducting group arraignments must also ascertain on the record that each defendant was present throughout the entire course of the arraignment, heard the remarks, and under- stood them. The right to be arraigned may ordinarily be waived, even when the charge is for a felony- level offense, provided the accused knows the nature of the charge offense and has a full opportunity to present a defense. The power to waive an arraignment must usually be exercised by the accused in person. Where the right of the accused to waive an arraignment is recognized, an express WAIVER in OPEN COURT is sufficient. An arraignment may also be waived in a less formal manner, such as by the voluntary entry of a plea, by failing to call the court’s attention to a defect in the proceedings at the proper time, by announcing readiness for trial, by going to trial without objection, or by filing motions and obtaining rulings on issues of law in the case. CROSS REFERENCES Hearing; Incarceration; Sixth Amendment; Trial. GALE ENCYCLOPEDIA OF AMERICAN LAW, 3RD E DITION ARRAIGNMENT 369 ARRAY The entire group of jurors selected for a trial from which a smaller group is subsequently chosen to form a petit jury or a grand jury; the list of potential jurors. Virtually all states have enacted statutes delineating requirements for jury service. In most states, convicted felons and insane persons cannot be jurors. Professional persons such as judicial and govern ment officials, lawyers, ministers, and medical personnel may be exempted by statute from jury service. As a general rule, a group of local officials acting within the statutory framework select the persons who will make up the array. ARREARS A sum of money that has not been paid or has only been paid in part at the time it is due. A person who is “in arrears” is behind in payments due and thus has outstanding debts or liabilities. For example, a tenant who has not paid rent on the day it is due is in arrears. Arrears may also refer to the late distribution of the dividends of cumulative PREFERRED STOCK. ARREST A seizure or forcible restraint; an exercise of the power to deprive a person of his or her liberty; the taking or keeping of a person in custody by legal authority, especially, in response to a criminal charge. The purpose of an arrest is to bring the arrestee before a court or otherwise secure the administratio n of the law. An arrest serves the function of notifying the community that an individual has been accused of a crime and also may admonish and deter the arrested individual from committing other crimes. Arrests can be made on both criminal charges and civil charges, although civil arrest is a drastic measure that is not looked upon with favor by the courts. The federal Constitution imposes limits on both civil and criminal arrests. An arrest may occur (1) by the touching or putting hands on the arrestee; (2) by any act that in dicates an intentio n to take the arrestee into custody and that subjects the arrestee to the actual control and will of the person making the arrest; or (3) by the consent of the person to be arrested. There is no arrest where there is no restraint, and the restraint must be under real or pretended legal authority. However, the deten- tion of a person need not be accompanied by formal words of arrest or a station house booking to constitute an arrest. The test used to determine whether an arrest took place in a particular case is objective, and it turns on whether a REASONABLE PERSON under these circumstances would believe he or she was restrained or free to go. A reasonable person is one who is not guilty of criminal conduct, overly apprehe nsive, or insensitive to the seriousness of the circumstances. Reason- ableness is not determined in light of a defen- dant’s subjective knowledge or fears. The subjective intent of the police is also normally irrelevant to a court’s determination whether an arrest occurred, unless the officer makes that intent know n. Thus, a defendant’s presence at a police station by consent does not become an arrest solely by virtue of an officer’s subjective view that the DEFENDANT is not free to leave, absent an act indicating an intention to take the defendant into custody. An arrest constitutes a SEIZURE under the FOURTH AMENDMENT to the U.S. Constitution, and thus the procedures by which a person is arrested must comply with the protections guaranteed by the Fourth Amendment or the arrest will be invalidated and any evidence seized during the arrest or confessions made after the arrest will typically be suppressed. The U.S. Supreme Court has ruled that arrests made without a valid ARREST WARRANT based on PROBABLE CAUSE are presumptively invalid under the Fourth Amen dment. Similarly, arrests made pursuant to a warrant that is later ruled defective may also be declared invalid, unless the officer in procuring the warrant and making the arrest acted in GOOD FAITH. However, warrantless arrests do pass con- stitutional muster under some circumstances. The Supreme Court has ruled that warrantless arrests can be made when the circumstances make it reasonable to do so. For example, no warrant is required for a FELONY arrest in a public place, even if the arresting officer had ample time to procure a warrant, so long as the officer possessed probable cause that the suspect committed the crime. Felony arrests in places not open to the public generally do require a warrant, unless the officer is in HOT PURSUIT of a fleeing FELON. Warden v. Hayden, 387 U.S. 294, GALE ENCYCLOPEDIA OF AMERICAN LAW, 3RD E DITION 370 ARRAY 87 S. Ct. 1642, 18 L.Ed.2d 782 (1967), The Fourth Amendment also allows warrantles s arrests for misdemeanors committed in an officer’s presence. The exceptions to the Fourth Amendment’s warrant requirement are based on the court’s reluctance to unduly impede the job of law enforcement officials. Courts attempt to strike a balance between the practical realities of daily police work and the privacy and freedom interests of the public. Always requiring police officers to take the time to obtain an arrest warrant could result in the destruction of evidence, the disappearance of suspects, or both. When an officer does seek an arrest warrant, the officer must present evidence to a neutral judge or magistrate sufficient to establish probable cause that a crime has been commit- ted. The Supreme Court has said that probable cause exists when the facts within an officer’s knowledge provide a reasonably trustworthy basis for a person of reasonable caution to believe that an offense has been committed or is about to be committ ed. Courts will deny requests when the warrant fails to describe in particularized detail the person to be arrested. The evidence upon which a warrant is based need not be ultimately ADMISSIBLE at trial, but it cannot be based on KNOWINGLY or intentionally false statements, or statements made in reckless disregard of the truth. However, inaccuracies found in a warrant due to ordinary NEGLIGENCE will not typically jeopardize a warrant’s validity. Police officers need no justification to stop someone on a public street and ask questions, and individuals are completely entitled to refuse to answer any such questions and go about their business. However, the Fourth Amendment prohibits police officers from detaining pedes- trians and conducting any kind of search of their clothing without first possessing a reason- able and articulable SUSPICION that the pedes- trians are engaged in criminal activity. TERRY V. OHIO, 392 U.S. 1, 88 S. Ct. 1868, 21 L. Ed. 889 (1968). Police may not even compel a pedestri- an to produce identification without first meeting this standard. Similarly, police may not stop motorists without first having a reasonable and articulable suspicion that the driver has violated a traffic law. If a police officer has satisfied this standard in stopping a motorist, the officer may conduct a search of the vehicle’s interior, including the glove com- partment, but not the trunk, unless the officer has probable cause to believe that it contains CONTRABAND or the instruments for criminal activity. Investigatory stops or detentions must be limited and temporary, lasting no longer than necessary to carry out the purpose of the stop or detention. An investigatory stop that lasts too long turns into a DE FACTO arrest that must comply with the warrant requirements of the Fourth Amendment. But no bright line exists for determining when an investigatory stop becomes a de facto arrest, as courts are reluctant to hamstring the flexibility and discretion of police officers by placing artificial time limita- tions on the fluid and dynamic nature of their investigations. Rather, the test is whether the detention is temporary and whether the police acted with reasonable dispatch to quickly confirm or dispel the suspicions that initially induced the investigative detention. An anti-war protester is arrested on charges of disorderly conduct and obstruction of government administration by a New York police officer. The procedures by which a person is arrested must comply with the protections guaranteed by the Fourth Amendment. AP IMAGES GALE ENCYCLOPEDIA OF AMERICAN LAW, 3 RD E DITION ARREST 371 A sample arrest warrant F.C.A. §§153, 153-a Arrest Warrant General Form 3 (Warrant of Arrest) FAMILY COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK COUNTY OF In the Matter of Petitioner(s) against Respondent(s) IN THE NAME OF THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK TO ANY (POLICE)(PEACE) OFFICER IN THE STATE OF NEW YORK A petition under Article __________ of the Family Court Act having been filed in this Court, a copy of which is annexed hereto, and it appearing that one of the grounds for issuance of a warrant as specified in the Family Court Act exists, YOU ARE THEREFORE COMMANDED forthwith to arrest [specify name(s)]: and bring said person(s) before this Court to be dealt with according to law. YOU ARE FURTHER COMMANDED, under the Family Court Act, to bring before this Court the following child or children: Name(s) Date(s) of Birth THIS WARRANT [check applicable box(es)]: ٗ may ٗ may not be executed on Sunday. ٗ may ٗ may not be executed at night. ٗ is subject to the following restriction(s) [specify]: Dated: _______________________________________ , ____. Docket No. __________________ WARRANT OF ARREST [continued] GALE ENCYCLOPEDIA OF AMERICAN LAW, 3RD E DITION 372 ARREST Not all arrests are made by members of law enforcement. Many jurisdictions permit private citizens to make arrests. Popularly known as citizen’sarrests,the circumstances under which private citizens may place each other under arrest are normally very limited. All jurisdictions that authorize citizen’s arrests prohibit citizens from making arrests for unlawful acts committed outside their presence. Most jurisdictions that authorize citizen’s arrests also allow citizens to make arrests only for serious crimes, such as felonies and gross misdemeanors, and then only when the arresting citizen has probable cause to believe the arrestee committed the serious crime. Witnessing the crime in person will normally establish probable cause for making an arrest. Both private citizens and law enforcement officers may be held liable for the tort of FALSE ARREST in civil court. An ACTION for false arrest requires proof that the process used for the arrest was void on its face. In other words, one who confines another, while purporting to act by authority of law which does not in fact exist, makes a false arrest and may be required to pay money damages to the victim. To make out a claim for false arrest, the PLAINTIFF must show that the charges on which he or she was arrested ultimately lacked justification. That is, the plaintiff in a false arrest action must show that the arrest was made without probable cause and for an improper purpose. CROSS REFERENCES Accusation; Charge; Civil Procedure; Contraband; Criminal Action; Criminal Law; Criminal Procedure; De Facto; Evidence; Felony; Fourth Amendment; Hot Pursuit; Liability; Probable Cause; Seizure; Tort Law. ARREST OF JUDGMENT The postponement or stay of an official decision of a court, or the refusal to render such a determination, after a verdict has been reached in an action at law or a criminal prosecution, because some defect appears on the face of the record that, if a decision is made, would make it erroneous or reversible. NOTICE TO RESPONDENT PARENT(S) IN CHILD ABUSE OR NEGLECT CASES: PLACEMENT OF YOUR CHILD IN FOSTER CARE MAY RESULT IN YOUR LOSS OF YOUR RIGHTS TO YOUR CHILD. IF YOUR CHILD STAYS IN FOSTER CARE FOR 15 OF THE MOST RECENT 22 MONTHS, THE AGENCY MAY BE REQUIRED BY LAW TO FILE A PETITION TO TERMINATE YOUR PARENTAL RIGHTS AND MAY FILE BEFORE THE END OF THE 15 MONTH PERIOD. IF SEVERE OR REPEATED ABUSE IS PROVEN BY CLEAR AND CONVINCING EVIDENCE, THIS FINDING MAY CONSTITUTE THE BASIS TO TERMINATE YOUR PARENTAL RIGHTS. Family Court Act §155(1) provides that: “ If an adult respondent is arrested under this act when the family court is not in session, he or she shall be taken to the most accessible magistrate and arraigned. The production of a warrant issued by the family court, a certificate of warrant, a copy or a certificate of the order of protection or temporary order of protection, an order of protection or temporary order of protection, or a record of such warrant or order from the statewide computer registry established pursuant to section 221-a of the executive law shall be evidence of the filing of an information, petition or sworn affidavit, as provided in section 154-d of this article. Upon consideration of the bail recommendation, if any, made by the family court and indicated on the warrant or certificate of warrant, the magistrate shall thereupon commit such respondent to the custody of the sheriff, as defined in subdivision 35 of section 1.20 of the criminal procedure law, admit to, fix or accept bail, or parole him or her for hearing before the family court, subject to the provisions of subdivision four of section 530.11 of the criminal procedure law concerning arrests upon a violation of an order of protection.” Family Court Act §155-a provides that: “A desk officer in charge at a police station, county jail or police headquarters, or any of his or her superior officers, may, in such place, take cash bail for his or her appearance before the appropriate court the next morning from any person arrested pursuant to a warrant issued by the family court; provided that such arrest occurs between eleven o'clock in the morning and eight o'clock the next morning, except that in the city of New York bail shall be taken between two o'clock in the afternoon and eight o'clock the next mornin g . The amount of such cash bail shall be the amount fixed in the warrant of arrest.” Arrest Warrant ________________________________________________ FAMILY COURT JUDGE BAIL IN THE SUM OF ($ ) DOLLARS IS RECOMMENDED. ___________________________________________________ FAMILY COURT JUDGE A sample arrest warrant (continued) ILLUSTRATION BY GGS CREATIVE RESOURCES. REPRODUCED BY PERMISSION OF GALE, A PART OF CENGAGE LEARNING. GALE ENCYCLOPEDIA OF AMERICAN LAW, 3 RD E DITION ARREST OF JUDGMENT 373 Although the Federal Rules of CIVIL PROCEDURE make no such prov ision, state codes of civil procedure should be c onsulted concerning the issuance of an arrest of judgment in actions at law. In criminal proceedings, a DEFENDANT must make a motion for an arrest of judgment when the indictment or information fails to charge the accused with an offense or if the court lacks jurisdiction over the offense charged. State and federal rules of CRIMINAL PROCEDURE govern an arrest of judgment in criminal prosecutions. ARREST WARRANT A written order issued by authority of the state and commanding the seizure of the person named. An arrest warrant must be based on a complaint that alleges PROBABLE CAUSE that the person named has committed a specific offense, and it must be issued according to the formalities required by the rules of the court. The Federal Rules of CRIMINAL PROCEDURE specify that the warrant must be signed by the magistrate and must describe the offense charged. The DEFEN- DANT must be named or described in such a way that he or she can be identified with reasonable certainty. The warrant must also command that the defendant be arrested and brought before the nearest available magistrate. ARROGATION Claiming or seizing something without justifi ca- tion; claiming something on behalf of another. In civil law, the adoption of an adult who was legally capable of acting for himself or herself. ARSON At common law, the malicious burning or exploding of the dwelling house of another, or the burning of a building within the curtilage, the immediate surrounding space, of the dwelling of another. Modern legislation has extended the defini- tion of arson to include the burning or exploding of commercial and public buildings—such as restaurants and schools—and structures—such as bridges. In many states, the act of burning any insured dwelling, regardless of whether it belongs to another, constitutes arson if it is done with an in tent to DEFRAUD the insurer. Finally, the common-law rule that the property burned must belong to another person has been completely eliminated by statute in some states. Elements The main elements necessary to prove arson are evidence of a burning and evidence that a criminal act caused the fire. The accused must intend to burn a building or other structure. Absent a statutory description of the conduct required for arson, the conduct must be malicious, and not accidental. Malice, however, does not mean ill will. Intentional or outrageously reckless con- duct is sufficient to constitute malice. Motive, on the other hand, is not an essential element of arson. Unless a statute extends the crime to other property, only a house used as a residence, or buildings immediately surr ounding it, can be the subject of arson. If a house is vacated, is 7,986 692 7,600 714 8,529 664 8,861 775 Property Loss in Intentionally Set Fires, 2003 to 2007 9,905 733 0 2,000 4,000 6,000 8,000 10,000 12,000 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 Year Property loss, in millions of dollars Intentionally set structural fires Structural fires SOURCE: National Fire Protection Association, “2006 U.S. Fire Loss,” NFPA Journal, November 2007 and prior issues, and Fire Loss in the United States, Au g ust 2008. ILLUSTRATION BY GGS CREATIVE RESOURCES. REPRODUCED BY PERMISSION OF GALE, A PART OF CENGAGE LEARNING. GALE ENCYCLOPEDIA OF AMERICAN LAW, 3 RD E DITION 374 ARREST WARRANT closed up, or becomes unfit for human habita- tion, its burning will not constitute arson. A temporary absence from a dwelling will not negate its character as a residence. Generally, the actual presence of a person within a dwelling at the moment it is burned is not necessary. It may, however, be required for a particular degree of the crime. The fact, and not the knowledge, of human occupancy is what is essential. If a dwelling is burned under the impression that it is uninhabited when people actually live in it, the crime is commi tted. Absent a statute to the contrary, a person is innocent of arson if that individual burns his or her own property while living there. The common exception to this rule is the burning of one’s own property with an intent to defraud or prejudice the property insurer. In addition, under statutes that punish the burning of a dwelling house without expressly requiring it to be the property of another, a person who burns his or her own property might be guilty of arson. An owner, for purposes of arson, is the person who possesses the house and has the care, control, and management of it. In those states that have maintained the common-law rule that the property burned must belong to another person, an owner who burns his or her house while it is in the possession of a lawful tenant is guilty of arson. Degrees In many states arson is divided into degrees, depending sometimes on the value of the property but more commonly on its use and whether the crime was committed in the day or night. A typical statute might make the burning of an inhabited dwelling house at night first-degree arson, the burning of a building close enough to a dwelling so as to endanger it second-degree arson, and the burning of any structure with an intent to defraud an insurer thereof, third-degree arson. Many statutes vary the degree of the crime according to the criminal intent of the accused. Punishment Arson is a serious crime that was punishable by death under the COMMON LAW. Presently, it is classified as a FELONY under most s tatutes, punishable by either imprisonment or deat h. Many jurisdictions impose prison sentences commensurate with the seriousness of the criminal intent of the accused. A finding, therefore, that the offense was committed inten- tionally will result in a longer prison sentence than a finding that it was done recklessly. When a human life is endangered, the penalty is most severe. ART LAW The Framers of the Constitution acknowledged the importance of the arts when they wrote that Cong ress shall have the power “[t]o pro- mote the Progress of Science and use ful Arts, by securing for limited Times to Authors and Inventors the exclusive Right to their respective Writings and Discoveries” (Art. I, § 8). Despite this provision, or perhaps because of its very limited nature, the federal government offered little assistance to artists until the 1930s. Early unsuccessful attempts to aid the arts included an effort by President JAMES BUCHANAN to establish the National Commission of Fine Arts, a project that failed within a year when Congress did not appropriate funds. President Number of Intentionally Set Fires, 2003 to 2007 Year Number of fires, in thousands 0 100 2003 2004 2005 2006 38 482 37 489 32 479 493 31 498 32.5 2007 200 300 400 500 600 SOURCE: National Fire Protection Association, “2006 U.S. Fire Loss,” NFPA Journal, November 2007 and prior issues, and Fire Loss in the United States, Au g ust 2008. Intentionally set structural fires Structural fires ILLUSTRATION BY GGS CREATIVE RESOURCES. REPRODUCED BY PERMISSION OF GALE, A PART OF CENGAGE LEARNING. GALE ENCYCLOPEDIA OF AMERICAN LAW, 3 RD E DITION ART LAW 375 THEODORE ROOSEVELT also encountered a reluctant Congress half a century later when he proposed the Council of Fine Arts, but success came when his successor, WILLIAM HOWARD TAFT, persuaded Congress to create the National Commission of Fine Arts. Even after the National Commission of Fine Arts was established, the federal government continued to play a minor role in funding the arts, but several municipal programs attempted to fill the void. In New York City the Civil Works Administration (CWA) sponsored paint- ings, murals, and art education. The primary goal of the CWA was to create employment for artists receiving government relief. With the only requirement for employment being an assertion that the applicant was an artist, the art produced under the CWA was often the work of unskilled amateurs. Federal funding for the arts took off during the Great Depression with the creation of the Federal Art Project, a branch of the Works Progress Administration (WPA). The Federal Art Project was modeled on some of the earlier municipal attempts but avoided their problems by emphasizing the production of wor ks of high technical competence, utilizing defined hiring guidelines, and encouraging creativity and experimentation. The Federal Art Project paid a security wage, an amount that was calculated to fall between the prevailing wage and the relief grants of the region involved and was graduated according to skill level. The WPA spent $35 million on the Federal Art Project and supported the production of approximately 1,500 murals, 18,800 sculptures, and 108,000 paintings as well as other works of art. The onset of WORLD WAR II effectively ended the WPA. Lucile Lloyd puts the finishing touches on a new mural in the California State Building in Los Angeles in December 1936. The work was completed under the auspices of the Federal Art Project. BETTMANN/CORBIS. GALE ENCYCLOPEDIA OF AMERICAN LAW, 3 RD E DITION 376 ART LAW In the COLD WAR era following World War II, the federal government funded cultural exchanges to promote diplomatic ends. The major cultural institutions were located primarily in large cities, such as New York, Los Angeles, Chicago, and Boston. In 1965 only five state arts agencies existed. The quality of performances and exhibitions was inconsistent, and support for the best art depended on the discretion and charity of a few patrons. As a result, opportu- nities for artists were limited, and rural audiences had few chances to see the best productions or visit outstanding exhibitions. In the mid-1990s, federal financial support for the arts and humanities was provided through several distinct agencies: the National Commission of Fine Arts, the National Endow- ment for the Arts (NEA), and the National Endowment for the Humanities (NEH). The Commission of Fine Arts, established in 191 0, advises the president, Congress, and govern- ment department heads on matters of architec- ture, sculpture, painting, and other fine arts. The commission’s primary function is to preserve and enhance the appearance of the nation’s capital, Washington, D.C. (40 U.S.C.A. § 104 [1986]). The National Foundation for the Arts and Humanities Act of 1965 (20 U.S.C.A. §§ 951– 968 [West Supp. 1990]) established the NEA and the NEH. The NEA provides grants to, or contracts with, groups and individuals of exceptional talent, and state or regional organi- zations engag ed in or concerned with the arts. NEA programs encourage individual and insti- tutional development of the arts, preservation of the American artistic heritage, wider availability of the arts, leadership in the arts, and the stimulation of nonfederal sources of supp ort for the nation’s artistic activities. The goal of the NEA is not to provide employment, as the WPA did, but rather to make the arts more widely available to U.S. citizens, to preserve the nation’s rich cultural heritage, and to encourage the creative development of the nation’s finest artistic talent. By 2003 the NEA had made more than 120,000 grants for theater, dance, sym- phonic music, painting, and poetry. As a major financier of the arts, the NEA has been a significant influence on much of the publicly exhibited art in the United States. For many years it led a quiet administrative existence, and although it was a force in the artistic community, the general public knew little about it. In late 1989, however, the organization became the center of controversy when some members of Congress questioned whether some works of art and performances funded by the NEA were OBSCENE. The NEA had provided funding for exhibits featuring the works of artists including Rober t Mapplethorpe and Andres Serrano. Mapplethorpe’s exhibit included sexually explicit photographs of men, and Serra no’s exhibit included a jar of urine into which a photograph of a crucifix had been placed. The uproar from the public, and from members of Congress, was so strong that in 1990 Congress enacted a law that required the NEA to take into consideration “general standards of decency and respect for the diverse beliefs and values of the American public. ” This became known as the decency test. Over the next several years other controver- sial grants were awarded and challenged, culmi- nating in a case that went to the U.S. Supreme Court. The case, National Endowment for the Arts v. Finley 524 U.S. 569, 118 S. Ct. 2168, 141 L.Ed. 2d 500 (1998), was brought by four artists including Karen Finley. Finley became infamous for a performance art piece in which she would remove her clothing and smear chocolate on her body. The work, she explained, symbolized the way women were exploited in society. Finley and her fellow plaintiffs argued that the 1990 statute was unconstitutional and that the decency test was a violation of the rights of free speech and due process. A district court agreed and the U.S. Court of Appeals upheld the district court ’s decision in 1996 100 F. 3d 671 (9th Cir.) In 1998 the Supreme Court ruled 8 to 1 that the law was constitutional, and that it violated no rights. Grant-seekers, the court noted, were required to submit their proposals to a panel representing diverse points of view; as such, the risk that an arbitrary ruling of indecency would be reached was minimal. In his dissent, however, Justice DAVID H. SOUTER warned that the law could force artists to censor their own work to ensure that it would not offend anyone in a position to approve a grant. The NEH funds activities are designed to improve the quality of education and teaching in the humanities, strengthen the scholarly foundation for humanities study and research, and advance understanding of the humanities GALE ENCYCLOPEDIA OF AMERICAN LAW, 3RD E DITION ART LAW 377 . unless the officer is in HOT PURSUIT of a fleeing FELON. Warden v. Hayden, 387 U.S. 294, GALE ENCYCLOPEDIA OF AMERICAN LAW, 3RD E DITION 370 ARRAY 87 S. Ct. 16 42, 18 L.Ed.2d 782 (19 67), The Fourth. IMAGES GALE ENCYCLOPEDIA OF AMERICAN LAW, 3 RD E DITION ARREST 3 71 A sample arrest warrant F.C.A. § 15 3, 15 3-a Arrest Warrant General Form 3 (Warrant of Arrest) FAMILY COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW. provisions of subdivision four of section 530 .11 of the criminal procedure law concerning arrests upon a violation of an order of protection.” Family Court Act 15 5-a provides that: “A desk officer