|
Canadian Criminal Law
The criminal law of Canada is under the exclusive legislative jurisdiction of the Parliament of Canada. The power to enact criminal law is derived from section 91(27) of the ''Constitution Act, 1867''. Most criminal laws have been codified in the ''Criminal Code'', as well as the '' Controlled Drugs and Substances Act'', '' Youth Criminal Justice Act'' and several other peripheral statutes. Prosecution A person may be prosecuted criminally for any offences found in the ''Criminal Code'' or any other federal statute containing criminal offences. In all Canadian provinces and territories, criminal prosecutions are brought in the name of the " King in Right of Canada", because the King of Canada is the country's head of state. There are two basic types of offences. The most minor offences are summary conviction offences. They are defined as "summary" within the Act and, unless otherwise stated, are punishable by a fine of no more than $5,000 and/or six months in jail. Examples ... [...More Info...] [...Related Items...] OR: [Wikipedia] [Google] [Baidu] |
Parliament Of Canada
The Parliament of Canada () is the Canadian federalism, federal legislature of Canada. The Monarchy of Canada, Crown, along with two chambers: the Senate of Canada, Senate and the House of Commons of Canada, House of Commons, form the Bicameralism, bicameral legislature. The 343 members of the lower house, the House of Commons, are styled as Member of Parliament (Canada), ''Members of Parliament'' (MPs), and each elected to represent an Electoral district (Canada), electoral district (also known as a riding). The 105 members of the upper house, the Senate, are styled ''senators'' and appointed by the Governor General of Canada, governor general on the advice of the Prime Minister of Canada, prime minister. Collectively, MPs and senators are known as ''parliamentarians''. Bills may originate in either the House of Commons or the Senate, however, bills involving raising or spending funds must originate in the House of Commons. By Constitutional convention (political custom), cons ... [...More Info...] [...Related Items...] OR: [Wikipedia] [Google] [Baidu] |
Mens Rea
In criminal law, (; Law Latin for "guilty mind") is the mental state of a defendant who is accused of committing a crime. In common law jurisdictions, most crimes require proof both of ''mens rea'' and '' actus reus'' ("guilty act") before the defendant can be found guilty. Introduction The standard common law test of criminal liability is expressed in the Latin phrase ,1 Subst. Crim. L. § 5.1(a) (3d ed.) i.e. "the act is not culpable unless the mind is guilty". As a general rule, someone who acted without mental fault is not liable in criminal law.". . . a person is not guilty of an offense unless he acted purposely, knowingly, recklessly or negligently, as the law may require, with respect to each material element of the offense." Model Penal Code § 2.02(1) Exceptions are known as strict liability crimes.21 Am. Jur. 2d Criminal Law § 127 Moreover, when a person intends a harm, but as a result of bad aim or other cause the intent is transferred from an intended victi ... [...More Info...] [...Related Items...] OR: [Wikipedia] [Google] [Baidu] |
R V Perka
''R v Perka'', [1984] 2 S.C.R. 232 is, along with ''R v Latimer'', a leading Supreme Court of Canada decision on the criminal defence of necessity. Background In 1979 a group of Cali, Colombia marijuana traffickers headed by Jaime deJesus Cordoba-Vargas and Jaime deJesus Marin-Jaramillo organized a venture to smuggle marijuana into the U.S. aboard the motor vessel ''Samarkanda'', a surplus U.S. Navy net tender converted to a tugboat and once called ''Alexandra''. The standard procedure for the group was to load contraband on "mother ships" in South America, sail north, then rendezvous with smaller "contact" vessels off the U.S. coast. They operated under the theory that if the ship picked up contraband on the high seas and delivered it on the high seas they would not violate any national laws except perhaps that of its flag country, Colombia. To a certain extent, the smugglers were correct. The stranger on Whale Creek In February 1979, the Drug Enforcement Administration in Seatt ... [...More Info...] [...Related Items...] OR: [Wikipedia] [Google] [Baidu] |
Necessity In Canadian Law
Canadian criminal law allows for a common law defence of necessity. ''Necessitas non habet legem;'' "Necessity knows no law." This well-known maxim reflects the theoretical basis of the defence of necessity: that in dire circumstances of looming peril, the claims of positive law seems to weaken.Kent Roach et al, Criminal Law and Procedure (Toronto: Emond, 2015) at 961. This controversial common law or judge-made defence has only been firmly recognized in Canadian law since 1984. It is recognized in Canada as a defence for crimes committed in urgent situations of clear and imminent peril in which the accused has no safe avenue of escape or legal way out of the situation. There is an objective or reasonableness requirement that requires the accused to reasonably resist the pressures that led to the commission of the crime. Anyone is entitled, by virtue oof the Criminal Code, to rely upon any excuse or defense available to him at common law. The defence of necessity The defence of n ... [...More Info...] [...Related Items...] OR: [Wikipedia] [Google] [Baidu] |
R V Daviault
''R v Daviault'' 9943 S.C.R. 63, is a Supreme Court of Canada decision on the availability of the defence of intoxication for "general intent" criminal offences. The Leary rule which eliminated the defence was found unconstitutional in violation of both section 7 and 11(d) of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms. Instead, intoxication can only be used as a defence where it is so extreme that it is akin to automatism or insanity. Background On May 30, 1989, Henri Daviault, a 73-year-old chronic alcoholic, was asked to get some alcohol for a friend of his wife. The woman was a semi-paralyzed 65-year-old and required a wheelchair. Daviault brought a 40oz of brandy to the woman's house around 6pm. She drank half a glass and then passed out. Daviault drank the rest of the bottle while she slept. Some time in the evening she went to the washroom and was accosted by Daviault who took her into the bedroom and sexually assaulted her. Daviault was arrested and charged for sexual assa ... [...More Info...] [...Related Items...] OR: [Wikipedia] [Google] [Baidu] |
Substance Intoxication
Substance intoxication is a transient condition of altered consciousness and behavior associated with recent use of a substance. It is often maladaptive and impairing, but reversible. If the symptoms are severe, the term "substance intoxication delirium" may be used. Slang terms for the state include: getting ''high'' (generic), and being ''stoned'', ''cooked'', or ''fried'' (usually in reference to cannabis). Substance intoxication may often accompany a substance use disorder (SUD); if persistent substance-related problems exist, SUD is the preferred diagnosis. The term "intoxication" in common use most often refers to alcohol intoxication, or drug addiction usually opioids consisting of an overdose; resulting in death. Classification The ICD-10 ''Mental and Behavioural Disorders due to psychoactive substance use'' shows: * F10. alcohol * F11. opioids * F12. cannabinoids * F13. sedatives and hypnotics * F14. cocaine * F15. caffeine * F16. hallucinogens * F17. t ... [...More Info...] [...Related Items...] OR: [Wikipedia] [Google] [Baidu] |
R V Stone
R, or r, is the eighteenth letter of the Latin alphabet, used in the modern English alphabet, the alphabets of other western European languages and others worldwide. Its name in English is ''ar'' (pronounced ), plural ''ars''. The letter is the eighth most common letter in English and the fourth-most common consonant, after , , and . Name The name of the letter in Latin was (), following the pattern of other letters representing continuants, such as , , , , and . This name is preserved in French and many other languages. In Middle English, the name of the letter changed from to , following a pattern exhibited in many other words such as ''farm'' (compare French ) and ''star'' (compare German ). In Hiberno-English, the letter is called or , somewhat similar to ''oar'', ''ore'', ''orr''. The letter R is sometimes referred to as the 'canine letter', often rendered in English as the dog's letter. This Latin term referred to the Latin that was trilled to sound l ... [...More Info...] [...Related Items...] OR: [Wikipedia] [Google] [Baidu] |
Automatism (case Law)
In criminal law, automatism is a rarely used criminal defence. It is one of the mental condition defences that relate to the mental state of the defendant. Automatism can be seen variously as lack of voluntariness, lack of culpability (unconsciousness) or excuse. Automatism means that the defendant was not aware of his or her actions when making the particular movements that constituted the illegal act. For example, in 1958, Esther Griggs threw her child out of a first floor window believing that the house was on fire, while having a sleep terror. In 2002, Peter Buck, lead guitarist of the band R.E.M., was cleared of several charges, including assault, which resulted from automatism brought on by a bad interaction between alcohol and sleeping pills. In a 2009 case in Aberporth in west Wales, Brian Thomas strangled his wife in their camper van, also during a sleep terror, when he mistook his wife for an intruder. The defence of automatism is denying that the person was acting ... [...More Info...] [...Related Items...] OR: [Wikipedia] [Google] [Baidu] |
R V Ruzic
''R v Ruzic'', 0011 SCR 687 is a leading decision of the Supreme Court of Canada on the common law defence of duress and constitutionality of the defence under section 17 of the ''Criminal Code''. The Court held that section 7 of the ''Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms'' requires that the defence of duress be available to an accused even when they were not under immediate threat of bodily harm at the time the offence was committed. Background Marijana Ruzic was 21-year-old Yugoslavian who lived in Belgrade with her mother. A man had threatened to harm her unless she assisted him by smuggling heroin into Canada. The man stalked her for some time and began threatening her, eventually escalating to violent assaults. Ruzic eventually complied and flew to Canada. She was arrested at Toronto Pearson International Airport for importing heroin. At trial, she pleaded that she only committed the crime under duress. A defence of duress, under section 17 of the ''Criminal Code'', is av ... [...More Info...] [...Related Items...] OR: [Wikipedia] [Google] [Baidu] |
Duress
Coercion involves compelling a party to act in an involuntary manner through the use of threats, including threats to use force against that party. It involves a set of forceful actions which violate the free will of an individual in order to induce a desired response. These actions may include extortion, blackmail, or even torture and sexual assault. Common-law systems codify the act of violating a law while under coercion as a duress crime. Coercion used as leverage may force victims to act in a way contrary to their own interests. Coercion can involve not only the infliction of bodily harm, but also psychological abuse (the latter intended to enhance the perceived credibility of the threat). The threat of further harm may also lead to the acquiescence of the person being coerced. The concepts of coercion and persuasion are similar, but various factors distinguish the two. These include the intent, the willingness to cause harm, the result of the interaction, and the optio ... [...More Info...] [...Related Items...] OR: [Wikipedia] [Google] [Baidu] |
Absolute Liability
Absolute liability is a standard of legal liability found in tort and criminal law of various legal jurisdictions. To be convicted of an ordinary crime, in certain jurisdictions, a person must not only have committed a criminal action but also have had a deliberate intention or guilty mind (''mens rea''). In a crime of strict or absolute liability, a person could be guilty even if there was no intention to commit a crime. The difference between strict and absolute liability is whether the defence of a “mistake of fact” is available: in a crime of absolute liability, a mistake of fact is not a defence. Strict or absolute liability can also arise from inherently dangerous activities or defective products that are likely to result in a harm to another, regardless of protection taken, such as owning a pet rattle snake; negligence is not required to be proven. Australia The Australian Criminal Code Act 1995 defines absolute liability in Division 6, subsection 2: Absolute liab ... [...More Info...] [...Related Items...] OR: [Wikipedia] [Google] [Baidu] |
Strict Liability (criminal)
In criminal law, strict liability is liability for which ( Law Latin for "guilty mind") does not have to be proven in relation to one or more elements comprising the ("guilty act") although intention, recklessness or knowledge may be required in relation to other elements of the offense ( Preterintentionally /ultraintentional /versari in re illicita). The liability is said to be strict because defendants could be convicted even though they were genuinely ignorant of one or more factors that made their acts or omissions criminal. The defendants may therefore not be culpable in any real way, i.e. there is not even criminal negligence, the least blameworthy level of . Strict liability laws were created in Britain in the 19th century to improve working and safety standards in factories. Needing to prove on the part of the factory owners was very difficult and resulted in very few prosecutions. The creation of strict liability offenses meant that convictions were increased. Com ... [...More Info...] [...Related Items...] OR: [Wikipedia] [Google] [Baidu] |
