Search for: "Rea v. United States" Results 41 - 60 of 655
Sort by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
28 Feb 2023, 10:40 am by Michael Oykhman
All of these definitions serve as important in determining whether the actus reus and mens rea elements are made out. [read post]
25 Jan 2023, 12:59 am by Florian Mueller
By coincidence, that was the day the United States Department of Justice and eight state AGs filed a second Unite States et al. v. [read post]
7 Dec 2022, 8:37 am by Michael Oykhman
This conduct can include publicly disobeying a court order (United Nurses of Alberta v Alberta (Attorney General), 1992 CanLII 99 (SCC)) R v Devost, 2010 ONCA 459 (CanLII) also stated that the identity of the accused as well as the date and time of their prohibited conduct must be confirmed (at para 34). [read post]
2 Dec 2022, 1:57 pm by Michael Oykhman
 In a case called United States of America v Dynar, 1997 CanLII 359 (SCC), [1997] 2 SCR 462 (a Canadian case) it was noted that “a person may be convicted of attempt, even when completion of the criminal act was impossible at the time”. [read post]
21 Sep 2022, 10:04 pm by Kurt R. Karst
  It’s a bedrock principle of criminal law that crimes require an actus reus (the prohibited act) and the requisite mens rea (mental state). [read post]
12 Sep 2022, 10:50 am by Michael Oykhman
This includes: The Internet Child Exploitation Unit (ICE) in Alberta integrates the RCMP, Calgary Police Service, Edmonton Police Service, Lethbridge Regional Police Service and Medicine Hat Police Service; The Internet Child Exploitation Unit (ICE) in Saskatchewan, which integrates the RCMP, Regina Police Service, Saskatoon Police Service and Prince Albert Police Service; The Integrated Child Exploitation Unit (ICE) in British Columbia; and The National Child Exploitation… [read post]
§ 793, prohibits “willfully retain[ing]” information “relating to the national defense which information the possessor has reason to believe could be used to the injury of the United States or to the advantage of any foreign nation” and “fails to deliver it on demand to the officer or employee of the United States entitled to receive it” (emphasis added). [read post]