Judicial Jurisdiction as Civil or Criminal

Following the Common Law and Natural Law, any type of legal proceeding must either be Civil or Criminal in nature. There is no hybrid jurisdiction in court, either the matter is pled as a civil case or a criminal case, and, there is no in between. A civil case can be brought on behalf of a private party, while a criminal case can only be brought on behalf of the state by a state appointed prosecutor. Thus, a prosecutor cannot bring a guardianship case in court, for example. Additonally, a prosecutur cannot bring a civil action for an involutary commitment either. Finally, there can be no case brought for "Criminal Insanity" since this involves some type of hybrid jurisdiction. Thus, the Pennsylvania Criminal Code 18 Pa. Stat. section 314, which is a disguised Criminal Insanity statute is clearly unconstitutional under both Subststantive and Criminal Due Process. The Pennyslvania statute has the crime of being "guilty but mentally ill" which then appears to carry a criminal penalty. And, of course, as I have asserted elsewhere, there can be no crime of "criminal insantity" because such a "crime" would involve a "status crime," which violates the Substantive Due Process requirements of Mens Rea and Actus Rea which are required at the Common Law. Any judge or prosecutor must be careful not to violate the Due Process requirements stated above, or, he or she could do major jail time under
18 United States Code section 242.

(C)Copyright 2010 by Anthony J. Fejfar