Search for: "KING v. FARRIS"
Results 1 - 6
of 6
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
2 Aug 2012, 10:49 am
King, No. 11-10182 (8-1-12) (en banc per curiam).A pithy en banc opinion that overrules 9th precedent in light of the Supremes" decision in Samson v. [read post]
18 Apr 2007, 9:16 am
King, No. 05-10629 (4-18-07). [read post]
6 Dec 2008, 3:03 pm
King v. [read post]
29 Jun 2018, 4:17 am
Commentary on Masterpiece Cakeshop v. [read post]
14 Sep 2008, 8:10 pm
Farris et alAT&T v. [read post]
4 Oct 2022, 8:16 am
Additionally, where an accused knows about certain evidence and denies any knowledge, an intent to mislead is established (see: Farris v The Queen, 1965 CanII 201 (ONCA)) Furthermore, as per R v Prashad, 2004 CanLII 34382 (ONCA) the Crown does not need to prove that the accused lied about a matter which is actually fact, only that he gave evidence that he knew to be dishonest with an intent to mislead the court. [read post]
