Use LEFT and RIGHT arrow keys to navigate between flashcards;
Use UP and DOWN arrow keys to flip the card;
H to show hint;
A reads text to speech;
33 Cards in this Set
- Front
- Back
- 3rd side (hint)
|
R. v. W.(D.) |
First, if you believe the evidence of the accused, obviously you must acquit. Second, if you do not believe the testimony of the accused but you are left in reasonable doubt by it, you must acquit. Third, even if you are not left in doubt by the evidence of the accused, you must ask yourself whether, on the basis of the evidence which you do accept, you are convinced beyond a reasonable doubt by that evidence of the guilt of the accused. |
|
|
|
R. v. Gladue |
G stabbed fiancé in heart. Drunk at time. Had been in fight earlier that night. During time before trial she moved back in with her father. Went back to school. Began drug and alcohol counseling. No mention was given about her being an Aboriginal Offender at trial. s.718.2(e) – all available sanctions other than imprisonment that are reasonable should be considered for offenders, with specific attention being paid to Aboriginal offenders. |
|
|
|
R. v. Tatton |
T caused a fire that destroyed the contents of his ex‑girlfriend’s home. In a highly intoxicated state, he placed a pan with oil on a stove, set the burner to high, and left the house to get a coffee. When he returned approximately 20 minutes later, the house was on fire. T was charged with arson contrary to s. 434 of the Criminal Code . At trial, T claimed that the fire was an accident. The trial judge determined that s. 434 was a specific intent offence, meaning that T could rely on self‑induced intoxication as a defence. T was acquitted. A majority of the Court of Appeal upheld the acquittal. |
|
|
|
R. v. Briscoe |
•Briscoe charged with murder, kidnapping, aggravated assault as a “party” who aided the principal(s): •He drove the group to the location •He chose the location (features of it helped the commission of the crime) •He opened trunk and gave principal a pair of pliers•He confronted victim after she had been struck with a wrench, held her in anger, told her to be quiet or “shut up” |
Briscoe likes to party |
|
|
R. v. Lavallee |
L abused by partner over period of time. Got in a fight he told her she would get it later. When leaving the room L shot partner in back of head. Expert testified to support defence of self-defence |
|
|
|
R. v. Tran |
• Tran was separated from his wife • He illegally entered her locked apartment and found her in bed with her boyfriend • Tran attacked them • Tran got a butcher knife and cut his wife’s face with a deep slash from the right ear across the entire right cheek (she lived) • Tran stabbed the boyfriend 17 times (six wounds were lethal) • Tran asserted provocation and was convicted of Manslaughter, Crown appealed, Alberta C.A. and Supreme Court set aside Manslaughter and affirmed conviction for Murder = no “air of reality” |
|
|
|
R. v. Latimer |
Latimer was convicted of 2nd degree murder. He had euthanised his daughter, who was disabled (cerebral palsy).The mandatory minimum sentence is life. The judge may set parole from 10 to 25 years; the jury gave 1 year; court upheld with 1 year probation. |
|
|
|
R. v. Boucher |
Aimé Boucher was a farmer in Beauce, Québec, and a practicing Jehovah's Witness. In 1946,[2] he was arrested while distributing pamphlets entitled "Québec's Burning Hate for God and Christ and Freedom Is the Shame of all Canada." The pamphlets criticized the Québec government suppression of the Witnesses and the courts for doing nothing to prevent it. Boucher was charged for seditious libel - for endeavouring to promote public disorder - under section 133(2) of theCriminal Code. At trial, the jury found Boucher guilty, which was upheld on appeal. |
|
|
|
R. v. Boudreault |
The accused was charged with having care or control of a motor vehicle (1) while his ability was impaired by alcohol and (2) with more than 80 mg. of alcohol in 100 ml. of his blood, contrary to ss. 253(1)(a) and (b) of the Criminal Code.The Court of Quebec, in a decision with neutral citation 2010 QCCQ 11443, acquitted the accused on both counts. The Crown appealed. |
|
|
|
R. v. Chase |
C was struggling with 15 yr old girl, touching her breasts Circumstances to look at when doing the test include:→ The part of the body touched, the nature of the contact, the situation in which it occurred, the words and gestures accompanying the act, and all other circumstances surrounding the conduct, including threats, will be relevant, the intent of the accused (not a determinative factor, but one that should be considered) |
Chase girls |
|
|
Section 722 of the Criminal Code of Canada |
22. (1) When determining the sentence to be imposed on an offender or determining whether the offender should be discharged under section 730 in respect of any offence, the court shall consider any statement of a victim prepared in accordance with this section and filed with the court describing the physical or emotional harm, property damage or economic loss suffered by the victim as the result of the commission of the offence and the impact of the offence on the victim. • Inquiry by court • (2) As soon as feasible after a finding of guilt and in any event before imposing sentence, the court shall inquire of the prosecutor if reasonable steps have been taken to provide the victim with an opportunity to prepare a statement referred to in subsection (1). • Adjournment • (3) On application of the prosecutor or a victim or on its own motion, the court may adjourn the proceedings to permit the victim to prepare a statement referred to in subsection (1) or to present evidence in accordance with subsection (9), if the court is satisfied that the adjournment would not interfere with the proper administration of justice. • Form • (4) The statement must be prepared in writing, using Form 34.2 in Part XXVIII, in accordance with the procedures established by a program designated for that purpose by the lieutenant governor in council of the province in which the court is exercising its jurisdiction. • Presentation of statement • (5) The court shall, on the request of a victim, permit the victim to present the statement by – (a) reading it; – (b) reading it in the presence and close proximity of any support person of the victim’s choice; – (c) reading it outside the court room or behind a screen or other device that would allow the victim not to see the offender; or – (d) presenting it in any other manner that the court considers appropriate. • Photograph • (6) During the presentation – (a) the victim may have with them a photograph of themselves taken before the commission of the offence if it would not, in the opinion of the court, disrupt the proceedings; or – (b) if the statement is presented by someone acting on the victim’s behalf, that individual may have with them a photograph of the victim taken before the commission of the offence if it would not, in the opinion of the court, disrupt the proceedings. • Conditions of exclusion • (7) The victim shall not present the statement outside the court room unless arrangements are made for the offender and the judge or justice to watch the presentation by means of closed-circuit television or otherwise and the offender is permitted to communicate with counsel while watching the presentation. • Consideration of statement • (8) In considering the statement, the court shall take into account the portions of the statement that it considers relevant to the determination referred to in subsection (1) and disregard any other portion. • Evidence concerning victim admissible • (9) Whether or not a statement has been prepared and filed in accordance with this section, the court may consider any other evidence concerning any victim of the offence for the purpose of determining the sentence to be imposed on the offender or whether the offender should be discharged under section 730 . • R.S., 1985, c. C-46, s. 722; • 1995, c. 22, s. 6; |
|
|
|
Sections 274, 275, & 278 of the Criminal Code of Canada |
C |
|
|
|
Section 34(2) of the Criminal Code of Canada |
(2) In determining whether the act committed is reasonable in the circumstances, the court shall consider the relevant circumstances of the person, the other parties and the act, including, but not limited to, the following factors:(a) the nature of the force or threat;(b) the extent to which the use of force was imminent and whether there were other means available to respond to the potential use of force;(c) the person’s role in the incident;(d) whether any party to the incident used or threatened to use a weapon;(e) the size, age, gender and physical capabilities of the parties to the incident;(f) the nature, duration and history of any relationship between the parties to the incident, including any prior use or threat of force and the nature of that force or threat;(f.1) any history of interaction or communication between the parties to the incident;(g) the nature and proportionality of the person’s response to the use or threat of force; and(h) whether the act committed was in response to a use or threat of force that the person knew was lawful. |
|
|
|
Legal Duty |
A legal obligation that entails mandatory conduct or performance. With respect to the laws relating to Customs Duties, a taxowed to the government for the import or export of goods.A fiduciary, such as an executor or trustee, who occupies a position of confidence in relation to a third person, owes suchperson a duty to render services, provide care, or perform certain acts on his or her behalf.In the context of Negligence cases, a person has a duty to comport himself or herself in a particular manner with respect toanother person. |
|
|
|
Recklessness |
Rashness; heedlessness; wanton conduct. The state of mind accompanying an act that either pays no regard to its probably orpossibly injurious consequences, or which, though foreseeing such consequences, persists in spite of such knowledge.Recklessness transcends ordinary Negligence. To be reckless, conduct must demonstrate indifference to consequences undercircumstances involving peril to the life or safety of others, although no harm is intended. |
|
|
|
Partial Defence |
Partial defense is a defense by which the defendant reduces the amount of damages of which he or she is liable. It goes either to part of the action or toward mitigation of damages. A defense is a denial, or answer or plea in opposition to the truth or validity of a claim by a plaintiff. |
|
|
|
Intention |
A determination to perform a particular act or to act in a particular manner for a specific reason; an aim or design; a resolutionto use a certain means to reach an end.Intent is a mental attitude with which an individual acts, and therefore it cannot ordinarily be directly proved but must be inferredfrom surrounding facts and circumstances. Intent refers only to the state of mind with which the act is done or omitted. It differsfrom motive, which is what prompts a person to act or to fail to act. |
|
|
|
Excuse |
: • Concedes the wrongfulness of the action, but asserts that the circumstances should not make the accused criminally responsible • Accused acted involuntarily |
|
|
|
Crown Discretion |
Prosecutorial discretion refers to the fact that under American law, government prosecuting attorneys have nearly absolute powers. A prosecuting attorney has power on various matters including those relating to choosing whether or not to bring criminal charges, deciding the nature of charges, plea bargaining and sentence recommendation. This discretion of the prosecuting attorney is called prosecutorial discretion. |
|
|
|
General Intent Offences |
General intent is defined the state of mind required for the commission of certain common law crimes not requiring specific intent and it usually takes the form of recklessness or negligence. Specific intent requires that a criminal defendant intended to achieve some result additional to the criminal act in order to prove all the elements needed to be found guilty of the crime. It differs from general intent, which only requires proof that the defendant intended to do the prohibited act. For example, the crime of larceny requires not only the general intent to take property, but also the specific intent to permanently deprive another of the property. |
|
|
|
Specific Intent Offences |
The main two elements for specific intent are[vi]: Intent to agree, or conspire; Intent to commit the offence which is the object of the conspiracy. |
|
|
|
Conditional Sentence of Imprisonment |
A conditional sentence is an imprisonment (jail) sentence, except that the offender serves the sentence outside of jail, under strict, jail-like conditions. Conditional sentences are sometimes called “house arrest ,” because they often require an offender to spend all or part of the sentence in their house. |
|
|
|
Wilful Blindness |
Willful blindness is a term used in criminal law to refer to the acts of a person who intentionally fails to be informed about matters that would make the person criminally liable. lt describes an attempt to avoid civil or criminal liability for a wrongful act by intentionally putting oneself in a position to be unaware of facts which create liability. For example, wilfull blindness has been used to deny the lack of intent defense of drug smugglers who claimed lack of knowledge of drug packages' contents. |
|
|
|
Role of Defence Counsel |
Defence counsel would most routinely appear after charges have been laid and make court appearances with the individual charged. The Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms allows any individual who is detained as part of an investigation to immediately contact counsel and seek legal advice from such counsel pre-charge. |
|
|
|
Probation |
A sentence whereby a convict is released from confinement but is still under court supervision; a testing or a trial period. Probation can be given in lieu of a prison term or can suspend a prison sentence if the convict has consistently demonstrated good behavior. |
|
|
|
Absolute Discharge |
An absolute discharge is the lowest-level adult sentence that an offender can get. If an offender gets an absolute discharge, a finding of guilt is made but no conviction is registered, and they are not given any conditions to follow (i.e. a probation order ). The offender is finished with their case that day. |
|
|
|
Denunciation |
A principle of sentencing in criminal law; that the sentence send a clear message to the general public that the offence is serious and the punishment just. |
|
|
|
Deterrence |
Deterrence is the use of punishment as a threat to deter people from offending. Deterrence is often contrasted with retributivism, which holds that punishment is a necessary consequence of a crime and should be calculated based on the gravity of the wrong done. |
|
|
|
Negligence |
Negligence (Lat. negligentia, from neglegere, to neglect, literally "not to pick up something") is a failure to exercise the care that a reasonably prudent person would exercise in like circumstances. The area of tort law known as negligence involves harm caused by carelessness, not intentional harm |
|
|
|
Common Law |
Common law (also known as case law or precedent) is law developed by judges, courts, and similar tribunals, stated in decisions that nominally decide individual cases but that in addition have precedential effect on future cases. |
|
|
|
Causation |
Causation is the "causal relationship between conduct and result". That is to say that causation provides a means of connecting conduct with a resulting effect, typically an injury. |
|
|
|
Conditional Discharge |
A conditional discharge is a sentence passed by a court whereby the defendant is not punished, provided they comply with certain conditions. After these conditions are met, the discharge becomes absolute. If the conditions are not met, the defendant is re-sentenced. |
|
|
|
Rehabilitation |
Rehabilitation is the act of restoring something to its original state, like the rehabilitation of the forest that had once been cleared for use as an amusement park. The noun rehabilitation comes from the Latin prefix re-, meaning “again” and habitare, meaning “make fit.” |
|
