defendant’s liberty or in the defendant’s death, outcomes far more severe than occur in civil trials where money damages are the common remedy. Reasonable doubt is required in criminal proceedings under the due process clause of the FIFTH AMENDMENT to the U.S. Constitution. In In re Winship (397 U.S. 358, 90 S. Ct. 1068, 25 L. Ed. 2d 368 [1970]), the U.S. SUPREME COURT ruled that the highest standard of proof is grounded on “a fundamental value determination of our society that it is far worse to convict an innocent man than to let a guilty man go free.” The reasonable doubt standard is not used in every stage of a criminal prosecution. The prosecution and defense need not prove beyond a reasonable doubt that every piece of evidence offered into trial is authentic and relevant. If a prosecutor or defendant objects to a piece of evidence, the objecting party must come forward with evidence showing that the dis- puted evidence should be excluded from trial. Then the trial judge decides to admit or exclude it based on a prepond erance of the evidence presented. A similar procedure employing a preponderance standard is used when a party challenges a variety of evidence, such as coerced confessions, illegally seized evidence, and state- ments extracted without the furnishing of the so-called Miranda warning. The reasonable doubt standard is inapplica- ble to still other phases of a criminal prosecu- tion. Lower standards of proof are permissible in PAROLE revocation proceedings, proceedings to revoke PROBATION, and prison inmate disci- plinary proceedings. In jury trials, a panel of 12 jurors must reach a unanimous verdict concerning whether the prosecutor has proven the defendant’s guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. In the event that the jury is unable to reach a unanimous verdict, the panel is said to be hung. Although the case is dismissed against the defendant in response to a HUNG JURY, the prosecutor has the discretion to bring the case against the defendant again. The unanimity of a criminal verdict is distinct from civil trials, in which a panel may render a verdict if, for example, three-fourths of the jurors agree. FURTHER READINGS Boyce, Ronald N., Donald A. Dripps, and Rollin M. Perkins. 2007. Criminal Law and Procedure. 10th ed. New York: Foundation Press. Loewy, Arnold H. 2003. Criminal Law in a Nutshell. 4th ed. St. Paul, Minn.: West. Whitman, James Q. 2008. The Origins of Reasonable Doubt: Theological Roots of the Criminal Trial. New Haven: Yale Univ. Press. CROSS REFERENCES Beyond a Reasonable Doubt; Clear and Convincing Proof; Criminal Law; Criminal Procedure; Due Process of Law; Preponderance of Evidence. REASONABLE FORCE The amount of force necessary to protect oneself or one’s property. Reasonable force is a term associated with defending one’s person or property from a violent attack, theft, or other type of unlawful aggression. It may be used as a defense in a criminal trial or to defend oneself in a suit alleging tortious conduct. If one uses excessive force, or more than the force necessary for such protection, he or she may be considered to have forfeited the right to defense. Reasonable force is also known as legal force. A person is generally justified in using force that is intended or likely to cause death or great bodily harm if the person reasonably believes that such force is necessary to prevent the commission of a forcible felony. The person is also generally justified in using such extreme force to prevent or terminate another’s unlawful entry into, or attack upon, a dwelling if: (1) the entry is made or attempted in a violent manner, and he reasonably believes that such force is necessary to prevent personal violence to himself or another then in the dwelling, or (2) he reasonably believes that such force is necessary to prevent the commission of a felony in the dwelling. Thus, using violent force against a would-be burglar who flees upon being discovered would likely be unnecessary and inappropriate and therefore not just ifiable. REASONABLE PERSON A phrase frequently used in TORT and CRIMINAL LAW to denote a hypothetical person in society who exercises average care, skill, and judgment in conduct and who serves as a comparative standard for determining liability. The decision whether an accused is guilty of a given offense might involve the application of an objective test in which the conduct of the accused is compared to that of a reasonable person under similar circumstances. In most cases, persons with greater than average skills, or with special duties to society, are held to a higher standard of care. For example, a physician GALE ENCYCLOPEDIA OF AMERICAN LAW, 3RD E DITION 268 REASONABLE FORCE who aids a person in distress is held to a higher standard of care than is an ordinary person. CROSS REFERENCES Negligence. REASONABLE TIME In the absence of an express or fixed time established by the parties to an agreement or contract (especially one that falls under the purview of the UNIFORM COMMERCIAL CODE [UCC]), any time which is not manifestly unreasonable under the circumstances. For example, if a contract does not fix a specific time for performance, the law will infer (and impose) a reasonable time for such perfor- mance. This is defined as that amount of time which is fairly necessary, conveniently, to do what the contract requires to be done, as soon as circumstances permit. The term “reasonable time” has other (related) applications: UCC 2-206(2) requires that acceptance of an offer be made within a “reasonable time” if no time is specified. The reasonableness or unreasonableness of time used or taken by a party may be the subject of JUDICIAL REVIEW in light of the nature, purpose, and circumstances of each case. In considering whether there has been unrea sonable delay in performance, a court may also consider other factors such as prior dealings between the parties, business routine or custom within the trade, and whether there were any objective manifestations of expec- tation expressed between the parties. REASONABLE WOMAN A standard used by fact finders in sexual harassment litigation to determine whether sexual harassment has occurred. Under title VII of the CIVIL RIGHTS Act of 1964 (42 U.S.C.A. §§ 2000e–2000e-2 [1988]), it is illegal for an employer to discriminate against employees on the basis of gender. Under SEXUAL HARASSMENT guidelines set forth by the EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION , the two basic types of sexual harassment are QUID PRO QUO sexual harassment and hostile environment harassment (29 C.F.R. § 1604 [1993]). Quid pro quo harassment occurs when an employer condi- tions employment opportunities on an employee’s submission to unwelcome sexual advances. Hostile environment harassment is unwelcome sexual conduct that interferes with an indivi- dual’s employment or creates an intimidating, hostile, or offensive work environment. The standard that is used in evaluating whether a person has been subjected to sexual ha ras sment varies from jurisdiction to jurisdiction: Some use a reasonable person standard, and some use a reasonable woman standard. In evaluating alleged sexual harassment, the reasonable person standard is an objective standard of perception based on a fictitious, reasonable individual. In using this standard in a sexual harassment case, the fact finder would ask whether a reasonable person in the plaintiff’s position would have felt that the respondent’s actions constituted grounds for a sexual harassment claim. By contrast, a reason- able woman standard allows the fact finder to ask whether a reasonable woman in the plaintiff’s position would have felt that the respondent’s actions constituted sexual harass- ment. The difference is that the reasonable woman standard takes into account the differ- ent perceptions between men and women regarding words or actions of a sexual nature. Although a number of courts have applied the reasonable woman standard since it was first introduced in the 1980s, many courts take the position that the reasonable person standard is more objective because it is gender-neutral. The courts that use the reasonable woman standard recognize a difference between men and women regarding the effect of unwanted sexual interac- tion. Because women historically have been more vulnerable to RAPE and sex-related violence than have men, th ese courts believe that the proper perspective for evaluating a claim of sexual harassment is that of the reasonable woman. FURTHER READING Goldberg, Deborah B. 1995. “The Road to Equality: The Application of the Reasonable Woman Standard in Sexual Harrassment Cases.” Cardozo Women’s Law Journal 2. CROSS REFERENCES Sex Discrimination; Women’s Rights. REBATE Discount; diminution of interest on capital lent in consideration of prompt repayment thereof; re- duction of a charge that is not credited in advance but is returned subsequent to payment in full. A rebate can also be effected by the government, as a budgetary item, for the benefit of the public. As part of the economic stimulus of the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act, in 2009, the federal gover nment provided GALE ENCYCLOPEDIA OF AMERICAN LAW, 3RD E DITION REBATE 269 financial support to various state-run rebates concerning purchases considered to be in the public interest. For example, in July 2009, the U.S. Department of Energy announced a program to provide nearly $300 million in rebates to families for the purchase of qualified energy-efficient appliances. A tax rebate is a sum of money refunded to a taxpayer after full payment of the tax has been made. REBUS SIC STANTIBUS [Latin, At this point of affairs; in these circum- stances.] A tacit condition attached to all treaties to the effect that they will no longer be binding as soon as the state of facts and conditions upon which they were based changes to a substantial degree. REBUT To defeat, dispute, or remove the effect of the other side’s facts or arguments in a particular case or controversy. When a defendant in a lawsuit proves that the plaintiff’s allegations are not true, the defendant has thereby rebutted them. REBUTTABLE PRESUMPTION A conclusion as to the existence or nonexistence of a fact that a judge or jury must draw when certain evidence has been introduced and admitted as true in a lawsuit but that can be contradicted by evidence to the contrary. A rebuttable presumption can be over- turned only if the evidence contradicting it is true and if a reasonable person of average intelligence could logically conclude from the evidence that the presumption is no longer valid. For example, a person who has been judicially declared incompetent is presumed incompetent unless there is sufficient proof, usually in the form of medical testimony, that the person has regained competency. In CRIMINAL LAW, there is a PRESUMPTION OF INNOCENCE in favor of the accused. The prosecu- tion must establish BEYOND A REASONABLE DOUBT that the accused committed the crime charged. REBUTTER In COMMON-LAW PLEADING, the response made by a defendant to a plaintiff’s surrejoinder, which rebuts earlier denials ma de by the defendant. The making of a rebutter occurs in the third round of the series of pleadings made by the parties. First, there is the plaintiff’s declaration which is countered by the defend ant’s plea. Next, the plaintiff makes a replication which is answered by the defendant in his or her rejoinder. In the third stage of PLEADING, the plaintiff makes a surrejoinder to which the defendant responds by use of the rebutter. RECALL The right or procedure by which a public official may be removed from a position by a vote of the people prior to the end of the term of office. Recall is the retiring of an elected officer by a vote of the electorate. Som e state constitutions prescribe the procedure that must be followed in a recall—for example, requiring the filing of a petition containing the signatures of a specific number of qualified voter s. Recall can also refer to a subsequent appearance in the WITNESS STAND of someone who has already given testimony in court. That is, a witness can be recalled. RECAPTION Regaining possession of; taking back. Recaption is a COMMON LAW remedy exer- cised by an individual who has been wrongfully deprived of goods. Through recaption, the owner may lawfully claim and retake goods whenever he or she finds them, as long as this is done in an orderly and legal manner. An individual who removes his borrowed car that was not returned to him from his neighbor’s driveway is exercising recaption. Rather than reducing retail prices, many automobile manufacturers choose to offer rebates to new car buyers. KIM KULISH/ CORBIS SABA. GALE ENCYCLOPEDIA OF AMERICAN LAW, 3 RD E DITION 270 REBUS SIC STANTIBUS RECEIPT Acknowledgment in writing that something of value, or cash, has been placed into an indivi- dual’s possession; written confirmation of pay- ment rendered. Receipt of goods refe rs to the act of taking physical possession of them. RECEIVER An archaic term used in common law and civil law countries to designate an individual who holds and conceals stolen goods for thieves. Currently, an independent individual appointed by a court to handle money or property during a lawsuit. Courts appoint receivers to take custody, manage, and preserve money or property that is subject to LITIGATION so that when the final judgment is rendered, the property remains available to accomplish what has been ordered. The power to appoint a receiver is rarely utilized by the courts, and only upon a showing that it is required to preserve the property. RECEIVERSHIP cannot properly be used to coerce a party or to gain control of a business from someone who is capable of managing it. Receivership is an EXTRAORDINARY REMEDY, designed to benefit everyone involved. It is, however, a harsh remedy, since it involves restraining an indivi- dual’s property, removing it from his control, and causing additional legal expenses. The appointment of a receiver, which is a provisional remedy to be exercised while litigation is pending, is ordinarily prescribed by statute, as are a receiver’s powers. Generally, a receiver can be appointed only after a lawsuit is initiated. According to the statutes of different states, receivers have been appointed in actions for DIVORCE, the removal of a trustee, or the FORECLOSURE of a mortgage and in proceedings for the DISSOLUTION of a corporation, for an accounting of partnership money, or for a creditor’s suit. Under federal law, a judge can appoint a SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION (SEC) receiver in an action involving alleged SECURITIES misconduct by corporations or indi- viduals. The appointment of a receiver is justified when property in dispute is allowed to deterio- rate to the extent where emergency repairs are necessary, and where there is good reason to suspect that the property is going to be sold, wasted, taken out of state, misused, or destroyed if the co urt does not act to preserve it. A receiver can also be appoin ted in situations where it appears that no one with a LEGAL RIGHT to manage certain property is present, or no mentally competent adult is entitled to hold it. A receiver is sometimes appointed to preserve property during litigation between two parties who appear to have an equal right to use the property but who are unwilling to acknowledge each other’s interest. A judge can appoint a receiver following the filing of an application, or petition, with the court. In certain instances, all those who are interested in a case join together, and in the event that the court has jurisdiction over the property and the parties, an appointment can proceed upon their consent. An application for the appointment of a receiver is often submitted by a creditor. It might be FRAUD or collusion for a debtor to have a friendly creditor nominate an individual the debtor chooses. A receiver generally should not be appointed unless notice is served on all interested parties and a hearing is condu cted where a judge determines the merits of the case. On good evidence that an emergency exists, a judge can grant the petition for a receivership and hold a hearing as soon as possible thereafter. Obligations A receiver assumes control of all the property subject to the receivership but does not take title to the property and cannot exercise control over property outside the territorial authority of the court. Any property that has already be en transferred in a fraudulent sale designed to cheat creditors is beyond the reach of the receiver; however, the rece iver has the power to initiate a lawsuit, requesting that the court set aside the transfer. Any rights, such as liens or mortgages, which others have in the property, remain valid. Anyone in possession of property listed in the receivership order can be compelled to turn it over to the receiver. A refusal to comply, or interference with the receivership, is punishable as a CONTEMPT of court. A receiver does not represent the individual whose property is being administered, since the receiver is an officer of the court and is responsible to the court for protecting the interests of all opposing parties fairly. Where it is not clear how the receiver must perform his GALE ENCYCLOPEDIA OF AMERICAN LAW, 3RD E DITION RECEIVER 271 or her duty, the receiver may properly apply to the court for instructions. A receiver can be removed and held financially liable for failure to obey orders of the court, for neglect of duties, or for abuse of authority. The receiver must exercise judgment in fulfilling the duties, and her decisions must be reasonable. The receiver might be required to post a bond to ensure faithful performance of the duties and is required to account to the court at regular intervals for all the property entrusted to her during, and at the termination of, the appoint- ment. Compensation A receiver has a right to be compensated for services and to be reimbursed for costs or traveling expenses. In cases where it is necessary for the receiver to hire an attorney, counsel fees are allowed. To obtain compensation, the receiver submits an itemized report of services to the court. The amount of payment depends upon the extent and value of the property, the difficulties encountered, and the time spent. It is also based upon the receiver’s skill, experience, diligence, and the success of his efforts. The time and manner of payment are, for the most part, left to the discretion of the court; unless authorized by the court, it is illegal for the receiver to take payment money out of the property being managed. RECEIVERSHIP A court order whereby all the property subject to dispute in a legal action is placed under the dominion and control of an independent person known as a “receiver.” Receivership is an EXTRAORDINARY REMEDY, the purpose of which is to preserve property during the time needed to prosecute a lawsuit, if a danger is present that such property will be dissipated or removed from the jurisdiction of the court if a receiver is not appointed. Receivership takes place through a court order and is utilized only in exceptional circumstances and with or without the consent of the owner of the property. Federal Rule of CIVIL PROCEDURE 66 pertains to receivers appointed by federal courts. In SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION (SEC) receiverships, the federal government seeks to bring persons or entitles into receivership for violation of SECURITIES laws, such as the perpetration of a PONZI SCHEME. For example, the SEC can bring an action to freeze and enjoin the sale of assets, and then ask a federal court to appoint a receiver to prevent misuse or waste of those assets. Some factors that a court will consider in determining whether to appoint a receiver in such a case include: whether there has been FRAUD, whether there is imminent danger of any type of compromise to assets, and whether there are adequate legal remedies available. In recent years, these actions have become more common. RECEIVING STOLEN PROPERTY The offense of acquiring goods with the knowledge that they have been stolen, extorted, embezzled, or unlawfully taken in any manner. The earliest statute that made receiving stolen property a crime was enacted in England in 1692. It provided that the receiver—the person who accepts the property—should be deemed an accessory after the fact to the theft. The crime became a separate substantive offense in 1827, and it has been similarly treated in a majority of U.S. jurisdictions. Elements Receiving stolen property is defined by statute in most states. Generally it consists of four elements: (1) the property must be received; (2) it must have been previously stolen; (3) the person receiving the property must know it was stolen; and (4) the receiver must intend to deprive the own er of his or her property. A person receives stolen property by acquir- ing or taking manual possession of it. Physical possession, however, is not always required. Under some statutes, it is sufficient if the accused has exercised control over the property. For example, a statute may declare that paying for the property constitutes control, regardless of whether the accused has handled it. In many jurisdictions a belief that the property is stolen satisfies the knowledge element. It has been held that a mere suspicion does not constitute knowledge. Some statutes provide that a person has knowledge if he knows, or has reason to know, that goods are stolen. Another test is whether a reasonable person would suspect that the property was stolen. Knowledge is commonly proved by the circumstances surrounding the receipt of the property. For examp le, unexplained possession GALE ENCYCLOPEDIA OF AMERICAN LAW, 3RD E DITION 272 RECEIVERSHIP of goods that were recently stolen raises a presumption that the possessor received them illegally. In order to be guilty, the receiver must intend to deprive the owner of the property. The crime is committed even if the receiver intends to obtain a reward for returning the property because she has gained a benefit from depriving the owner of possession, even temporarily. Defenses An honest, although mistaken, belief that property is not stolen is a defense to the crime of receiving stolen property. Intoxication is another defense, but the intoxication must be severe enough to prevent any knowledge that the property was stolen. Infancy and insanity are also good defenses. Punishment The punishment for receiving stolen property is a fine or imprisonment. If the value of the goods is substantial a person could be sentenced to a felony-level punishment, which is greater than one year in prison. If the value of the goods is below the felony-level, a person could be sentenced to no more than one year or 90 days in jail. The term of years imposed varies from state to state. In jurisdictions where value is an element of the offense, the severity of the penalty is commensurate with the value of the goods. Where value is not an element, it might still be significant in determining the severity of the punishment. Civil Remedies In a majority of states, the person whose property was stolen may bring a conversion action against the receiver of stolen property. If the accused is found to have converted the property, the victim has a choice of remedies. The victim may demand that the accused return the stolen property or may require the accused to pay the full value of the property at the time it was converted. Federal Law Receiving stolen property is proscribed by federal statute (18 U.S.C.A. § 662) when it occurs within the maritime or territorial jurisdiction of the United States or when such property has moved in interstate commerce. RECESS In the practice of courts, a brief interval during which all business is suspended without an adjournment. A recess in legislative practice is an interval of time between sessions of the same continu- ous body, as opposed to the period between the final adjournment of one legislative body and the convening of another at the next regular session. RECIDIVISM The behavior of a repeat or habitual criminal. A measurement of the rate at which offenders commit other crimes, either by arrest or conviction baselines, after being released from incarceration. Both state and federal laws have been enacted in an attempt to reduce the number of repeat or habitual offenses. For example, Washington’s habit ual criminal statute imposes a minimum sentence of ten years imprisonment for persons convicted of a second felony, third misdemeanor, or third petit larceny. Further- more, in the event that a person is convict ed of a third felony, fifth misdemeanor, or a fifth petit LARCENY, the statute imposes a life sentence (Wash. Rev. Code § 9.92.090 [1996]). Another state that has enacted a recidivism statute is California. California’s recidivism statute, more commonly known as the THREE- STRIKES LAW, increases sentencing when the recidivist commits additional crimes. If the criminal is convicted of a second felony, the sentence doubles the sentence of the first- time felon, and if convicted of a third violent crime or serious felony, the person will be sentenced to triple the sentence of a first-time felon, or 25 years imprisonment, whichever is greater (Cal. Penal Code § 667 [West 1996]). The three-strikes law was passed in 1994, after a voter REFERENDUM received 71 percent support. The ballot measure was prompted by the 1993 abduction-murder of 12-year-old Polly Klaas in Petaluma, California. The killer, Richard Allen Davis, was a twice-convicted kidnapper who had been on PAROLE after serving only half of a 16-year prison term for the second KIDNAPPING. Because of the way the law is written, however, offenders with prior criminal records are being put behind bars for life for non-felony offenses such as petty theft and shoplifting. In March 2003 the Supreme Court ruled on two separate cases Ewing v. California, 538 U.S. GALE ENCYCLOPEDIA OF AMERICAN LAW, 3RD E DITION RECIDIVISM 273 11, 123 S. Ct. 1179, 155 L. Ed. 2d 108 (2003), and Lockyer v. Andrade, 538 U.S. 63, 123 S. Ct. 1166, 155 L. Ed. 2d 144 (2003), both involving California’s law providing for mandatory prison terms of 25 years to life for those convicted for the third time of a felony. The Court failed to overturn the law, despite arguments that the sentences of those challenging the law consti- tuted cruel and usual punishment in violation of the Eight Amendment. The federal govern- ment and 26 states now have a three strikes-type law, imposing as much as a life prison term for criminals convicted of a third felony. Congress also responded to the recidivism rates in the United States by enacting the VIOLENT CRIME CONTROL AND LAW ENFORCEMENT ACT OF 1994 (Pub. L. No. 103-322, 108 Stat. 1796). This act mandates life imprisonment for the commission of a serious violent felony or a combination of two or more serious felonies or drug offenses. There are many ideas on how to solve the problem of recidivism. Some of these include requiring literacy programs in penal institu- tions, electronic monitori ng of home confine- ment, greater use of halfway houses, and “boot camp” programs consisting of military march- ing, discipline, physical training, work, classes, and drug and alcohol treatment for young, first- time offenders. FURTHER READINGS Brooks, Justin. 1994. “Keeping the Jailhouse Lawyer out of Jail.” Criminal Justice 9 (summer). Burns, Jerald C., and Gennaro F. Vito. 1995. “An Impact Analysis of the Alabama Boot Camp Program.” Federal Probation 59 (March). Farrington, David P., and Roger Tarling, eds. 1985. Prediction in Criminology. Albany, N.Y.: State Univ. of New York Press. McClain, Meredith. 1996. “‘Three Strikes and You’re Out’: The Solution to the Repeat Offender Problem?” Seton Hall Legislative Journal 20 (July). McGovern, Virginia and Stephen Demuth. 2009. “Racial and Ethnic Recidivism Risks: A Comparison of Postincarceration Rearrest, Reconviction, and Reincar- ceration among White, Black, and Hispanic Releasees.” The Prison Journal 89. Potts, Jeff. 1993. “American Penal Institutions and Two Alternative Proposals for Punishment.” South Texas Law Review 34 (October). Zamble, Edward, and Vernon L. Quinsey. 2001. The Criminal Recidivism Process. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge Univ. Press. CROSS REFERENCE Determinate Sentence. RECIPROCAL Bilateral; two-sided; mutual; interchanged. Reciprocal obligations are duties owed by one individual to another and vice versa. A recipro- cal contract is one in which the parties enter into mu tual agreements. Reciprocal laws are statutes of one state that give rights and privileges to the citizens of another state if that state extends similar privileges to the citizens of the first state. A common example is the Reciprocal Enforce- ment of Support Act, which is a uniform law adopted in a majority of jurisdictions, by which a tribunal in the state where a wife or mother resides is able to commence proceedings for CHILD SUPPORT against a husband or father who resides in another state. There are other legal concepts using idea of reciprocality, including joint and reciprocal will, implied reciprocal servitude, reciprocal negative easement, reciprocal trust, reciprocal will, reciprocal discovery. RECISSION See RESCISSION. RECITAL A formal statement appearing in a legal document such as a deed that is preliminary in nature and provides an explanation of the reasons for the transaction. The recital in a deed, for example, might indicate the reasons why the owner is selling the property. In PLEADING, a recital is the statement of matter that is introductory to a positive allegation; it begins with the words, “For that whereas ” and is followed by the claim of the party. RECKLESSNESS A state of mind characterized by rashness, heedlessness of danger, or wanton conduct. The state of mind accompanying an act that either pays no regard to its probable or possible injurious consequences, or which, though foreseeing such consequences, irresponsibly persists in spite of such knowledge. It arises in matters of criminal as well as civil (i.e., tort) law, and the standards vary from state to state. GALE ENCYCLOPEDIA OF AMERICAN LAW, 3RD E DITION 274 RECIPROCAL Recklessness transcends ordinary NEGLI- GENCE . To be reckless, conduct must demon- strate indifference to consequences under circumstances involving peril to the life or safety of others (for example, wile driving or handling hazardous items or materials), even if no harm is intended. This behavior is particu- larly grievous when one recklessly endangers the life of a child or an elderly person. In two highly controversial cases in 2006 (Kilmon v. State and Cruz v. State), Maryland’s Court of Appeals reversed two women’s convictions for reckless endangerment of their unborn children, who tested positive for cocaine at birth. The court concluded that the state’s criminal recklessness standards had not been intended to apply drug use by pregnant women. RECOGNITION The confirmation or ACKNOWLEDGMENT of the existence of an act performed, of an event that transpired, or of a person who is authorized by another to act in a particular manner. In tax law, a capital gain is recognized when a taxpayer has actually received payment. Such gain must then be reported on INCOME TAX forms, and cap ital gains tax must be paid on it. In INTERNATIONAL LAW, the term recognition refers to the formal acknowledgment by one state that another state exists as a separate and independent government. Recognition is not a mere technicality. A state has no status among nations until it is recognized by other states, in spite of the fact that it might possess all other attributes of a state, including a definable territory and population, a recognizable gov- ernment, and a certain amount of continuity or stability. The decision to recognize a new national government is a political act that is in the discretion of the officials who are responsible for foreign policy. In the United States, the presi- dent makes the decision to recognize a country and can do so by making a formal announce- ment or by having another official, such as the SECRETARY OF STATE, make the announcement for him. Recognition can also be informal, such as by opening negotiations with a new state or exchanging diplomats with it. A nation is not truly sovereign and inde- pendent unless other nations recognize its sovereignty. Formal recognition operates to assure a new state that it will be permitted to hold its place and rank as an independent political body among the nations. Recognition takes effect from the time it is given as if the state had always existed, and a new government can carry fo rward interna- tional projects initiated by the old government it rep laces. Many difficulties come into play when a government is not recognized. For example, an unrecognized government is not entitled to participate in diplomatic negotiations or to have its laws applied in lawsuits or in jurisdictions. The term recogni tion is also used in relation to armed conflicts. If a state of belligerency is recognized, then the law of war applies with all of its protections for prisoners of war and noncombatants. Recognition of a state of belligerency ordinarily comes from an unin- volved state that declares itself neutral. A neutral country is able to recognize a state of belliger- ency and carry on trade and diplomatic relations with both sides of the conflict. RECOGNIZANCE A recorded obligation, entered into before a tribunal, in which an individual pledges to perform a specific act or to subscribe to a certain course of conduct. For example, an individual who owes money might enter into a recognizance whereby she agrees to satisfy the debt. In CRIMINAL LAW, an individual who has been found guilty of an offense can be mandated to enter into a recognizance whereby she agrees to keep the peace in the future. An individual who has been accused but not yet convicted of a criminal offense may be allowed to go free prior to the trial without being required to post a bail bond. The accused individual provides the court with a formal written statement, which declares that his failure to appear will precipitate payment to the court of a specifically indicated sum of money. This is known as a release on one’s own recognizance, or personal recogni- zance. RECONCILIATION The restoration of peaceful or amicable relations between two individuals who were previously in conflict with one another. GALE ENCYCLOPEDIA OF AMERICAN LAW, 3RD E DITION RECONCILIATION 275 Reconciliation ordinarily implies forgiveness for injuries on either or both sides. The term is often applied to the parties to a DIVORCE who cease proceedings for the dissolution of their marriage upon a resolution of their differences. Reconciliation is used interchangeably with conciliation. RECONSTRUCTION The term Reconstruction refers to the efforts made in the United States between 1865 and 1877 to restructure the political, legal, and economic systems in the states that had seceded from the Union. The U.S. CIVIL WAR (1861–65) ended SLAVERY, but it left unanswered how the 11 Southern states would conduct their internal affairs after readmission to the Union. Though some legal protections for newly freed slaves were incorporated into the Constitution by the Thirteenth, Four teenth, and Fifteenth Amend- ments, by 1877, conservative Southern whites had reclaimed power and had begun to disenfranchise blacks. ABRAHAM LINCOLN took the first steps toward Reconstruction in 1863 when he announced a post-war plan for the Southern states. Under these terms, a state would have to renounce slavery and agree to comply with the Constitu- tion. The states of Louisiana, Arkansas, and Tennessee agreed to these conditions and asked that its senators and representatives be read- mitted to Congress. Radical Republicans in Congress objected to this plan, contending that it would do nothing to change the Southern social system. They introduced a tougher bill that Lincoln vetoed, which left the state of Reconstruction uncertain at the time of Lin- coln’s assassination. The Freedmen’s Bureau was established as a social welfare agency for the newly freed slaves, but little else was agreed upon. Lincoln’s successor, President ANDREW JOHNSON , came from Tennessee. As governor, he had champ ioned his state’s readmission to the Union under Lincoln’s terms. As president, he revealed a hostility to the use of federal power to change the Southern way of life, in part because he wanted to rebuild the DEMOCRATIC PARTY and ensure his election in 1868. Radical Republicans became incensed when Johnson issued a general pardon for most Confederates and then issued proclamations that permitted the Southern states to rejoin the Union after holding a constitutional convention and agreeing to three conditio ns: repeal of the secession laws, repudiation of the Confederate debt, and ratification of the THIRTEENTH AMEND- MENT , which ended slavery in the United States. However, Johnson did not require the states to permit blacks to vote. In 1866 Southern whites took back the reins of government and proceeded to pass BLACK CODES, which restricted the freedoms of the newly freed slaves. Racial SEGREGATION was established, blacks were barred from serving on juries and as appearing as witnesses, and unemployed blacks were arrested and then auctioned off to employers to pay their fines. In 1866 Congress passed the FOURTEENTH AMENDMENT , which extended DUE PROCESS and EQUAL PROTECTION rights to all persons and barred states from violating these rights. Over time, this amendment would be used to apply most of the BILL OF RIGHTS to the states, but during the Reconstruction period it was used as the basis of additional statutes that imposed federal control over the Southern states. In 1867 the Radical Republicans passed the First Reconstruction Act; three other acts would later be passed by Congress to further define the scope of Reconstruction. These acts abolished the Southern government that Johnson had authorized, placed the South back under military control, announced new state constitu- tional conventions, mandated that blacks be allowed to vote, and prevented former Confed- erate leaders from serving as public officials. By mid-1868 Congress readmitted representatives from six states, and then the remainder complied with the act’s terms and were read- mitted in 1870. With these new constitutions in place, state and local elections took place. Though some blacks were elected to public office, most officeholders were white. However, most South- ern whites opposed these governments and the idea of black equality. This prevalent attitude led to VIGILANTISM and TERRORISM by various groups, including the KU KLUX KLAN (KKK). These groups used terror to discourage blacks from asserting their political rights and frighten whites who collaborated with the new govern- ments. Congress sought unsuccessfully to im- peach President Johnson, but Radical Repub- licans assumed conditions would improve with the election of General ULYSSES S . GRANT to the presidency in 1868. GALE ENCYCLOPEDIA OF AMERICAN LAW, 3RD E DITION 276 RECONSTRUCTION Grant disappointed supporters of Recon- struction over the ensuing eight years. Though Congress passed and the states ratified the FIFTEENTH AMENDMENT in 1870, it had very little impact in the South. The amendment prohib- ited voting discrimination based on race, but blacks were intimidated by the KKK and local employers and stayed away from the polls. Congress proceeded to pass three Force Acts in 1870 and 1871, wide-ranging criminal and civil laws that sought to curb vigilantism. Several parts of these Force Acts remain in effect, including the CIVIL RIGHTS TORT LAW 42 U.S.C.A. § 1983. These laws had some effect, but they required federal officers to enforce them. The desire of Northerners to continue this work had begun to ebb, and, by the end of Grant’s term in 1877, it became apparent that federal efforts were grinding to a halt. The 1876 presidential race between Repub- lican RUTHERFORD B. HAYES and Democrat SAMUEL TILDEN ended in an ELECTORAL COLLEGE deadlock due to disputed electors from Florida and Oregon. To avoid a constitutional crisis, a commission was appointed to review the contested states and decide on a winner. In the end, the Democrats allowed Hayes to be declared the winner in exchange for a promise that Hayes would withdraw all federal troops and give Democrats a portion of the patronage rights to federal jobs. The withdrawal of the troops symbolized the end of Reconstruction, but an earlier Supreme Court case had made clear that the legal system would resist a broad reading of the Fourteenth Amendment. In the SLAUGHTERHOUSE CASES,83 U.S. 36, 21 L.Ed. 394 (1873), the Supreme Court read the amendment’s PRIVILEGES AND IMMUNITIES CLAUSE virtually out of the Constitution. The Court effectively closed the door on the concept of privileges and immunities as an enforcement tool against state laws that restricted individual civil rights. On a 5–4 vote, the Court interpreted the clause as protecting only rights of national citizenship from the actions of the state government. This restrictive reading robbed the Privileges and Immunities Clause of any constitutional significance. Conservative white Democrats reasserted their authority in 1877 and began to disenfran- chise bla cks again. They enacted “Jim Crow” segregation laws that directly challenged the Fourteenth Amendment. The Supreme Court removed the last impediment to these efforts in the CIVIL RIGHTS CASES, 109 U.S. 3, 3 S.Ct. 18, 27 L.Ed. 835 (1883). The Court invalidated the CIVIL RIGHTS ACT of 1875, the last piece of Reconstruction legislation. This act proclaimed “the equality of all men before the law,” and promised to “mete out equal and exact justice” to persons of every “race, color, or persuasion” in public or private accommodations. The law sought to prohibit racial segregation of trains, trolleys, theaters, hotels, restaurants, and other places that are open to the public. The Supreme Court struck down the act, finding that the Fourteenth Amendment only prohibited official, state-sponsored discrimination. The Fourteenth Amendment could not reach dis- crimination practiced by privately owned places of public accommodation. This Fourteenth Amendment “state action” requirement remains a central tenet of modern civil rights law. The Court’s holding meant that racial segregation could be imposed by private businesses. More troubling was the Court’s belief, less than 20 years after the conclusion of the Civil War, that the time for concerns about equal treat- ment for blacks was over. The Court stated that blacks should no longer be “special favorite[s] of the law.” Reconstruction has come to be regarded as a missed opportunity for U.S. society. Many of the issues that concerned political leaders of that period returned a hundred years later in the modern CIVIL RIGHTS MOVEMENT. The Fourteenth Amendment would be revivified by the Su- preme Court, and surviving parts of the Force Acts would be used again. FURTHER READINGS Collier, Christopher. 1999. Reconstruction and the Rise of Jim Crow, 1864–1896. New York: Benchmark. Foner, Eric, and Olivia Mahoney. 1997. America’s Recon- struction: People and Politics After the Civil War. Baton Rouge, LA: Louisiana State Univ. Press. Peacock, Judith. 2003. Reconstruction: Rebuilding after the Civil War. Mankato, MN: Capstone. CROSS REFERENCES Civil Rights Acts; Discrimination; Jim Crow Laws; Racial and Ethnic Discrimination. RECONVEYANCE The transfer of real property that takes place when a mortgage is fully paid off and the land is returned to the owner free from the former debt. GALE ENCYCLOPEDIA OF AMERICAN LAW, 3RD E DITION RECONVEYANCE 277 . the benefit of the public. As part of the economic stimulus of the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act, in 2009, the federal gover nment provided GALE ENCYCLOPEDIA OF AMERICAN LAW, 3RD E DITION REBATE. improve with the election of General ULYSSES S . GRANT to the presidency in 186 8. GALE ENCYCLOPEDIA OF AMERICAN LAW, 3RD E DITION 276 RECONSTRUCTION Grant disappointed supporters of Recon- struction. cases Ewing v. California, 5 38 U.S. GALE ENCYCLOPEDIA OF AMERICAN LAW, 3RD E DITION RECIDIVISM 273 11, 123 S. Ct. 1179, 155 L. Ed. 2d 1 08 (2003), and Lockyer v. Andrade, 5 38 U.S. 63, 123 S. Ct. 1166,