Posted: May 18th, 2017

Does the result above change if Dawn offered convincing evidence both that she was addicted to narcotics and that she was a homeless person who was on the street because she had no other alternative?

Does the result above change if Dawn offered convincing evidence both that she was addicted to narcotics and that she was a homeless person who was on the street because she had no other alternative? (A) Yes. Because Dawn is an addict and homeless, punishing her for this crime when she has nowhere else to go would violate the Constitution. (B) Yes. Because Dawn is an addict and her disease compels her to take drugs, it would be cruel and unusual punishment to convict her for her status, rather than for a voluntary action that she undertook. (C) No. Because the law against being under the influence in public has been published in the state code, all citizens are presumed to know that this conduct is illegal. (D) No. Although Dawn is an addict, she does not lack free will. Because she could choose not to take drugs or not to do so in a public place, convicting her of being under the influence in public would not be prohibited.