Ad
related to: common intention in criminal law casesuslegalforms.com has been visited by 100K+ users in the past month
Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
Intent is defined in English law by the ruling in R v Mohan [1976] QB 1 as "the decision to bring about a prohibited consequence" (malum prohibitum). [1] [2] [3]A range of words represents shades of intent in criminal laws around the world.
Parliament reacted with s 8 of the Criminal Justice Act 1967 to restore the position originally at common law. In Frankland v The Queen, [3] Lord Ackner held DPP v Smith to be incorrect insofar as it required objective foresight in determining intention of murder, saying that the common law reflected s 8 of the 1967 Act.
Case history; Prior: Cert. to the United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit Holding; Mere omission of any mention of intent from the criminal statute was not to be construed as the elimination of that element from the crimes denounced, and that where intent was an element of the crime charged, its existence was a question of fact to be determined by the jury.
In R v Matthews and Alleyne, [4] the Court of Appeal concluded that the Woollin test was an evidential rather than substantial rule of law: judges ought to instruct jurors that they may interpret what they would see as certain knowledge on the defendant's part of the virtually certain consequence of death as evidence of intention, but Woollin ...
The common law gives intention "its normal meaning: purpose or aim", with judges advised not to, in the majority of cases, attempt to complicate the definition. [8] Conditional intent – where somebody has an intent to commit a crime only in certain circumstances – has also been deemed acceptable for an indictment for attempting a crime. [ 9 ]
R v Nedrick [1986] EWCA Crim 2 is an English criminal law case dealing with mens rea in murder. The case is a cornerstone as it sets down the "virtual certainty test". It applies wherever a form of indirect (oblique) intention is apparent and the charge is one of murder, or other very specific intent.
The common purpose doctrine was established in English law, and later adopted in other common-law jurisdictions including Scotland, Ireland, Australia, [2] Trinidad and Tobago, the Solomon Islands, Texas, the International Criminal Court, and the International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia. Common design also applies in the law of ...
Transferred intent (or transferred mens rea, or transferred malice, in English law) is a legal doctrine that holds that, when the intention to harm one individual inadvertently causes a second person to be hurt instead, the perpetrator is still held responsible.
Ad
related to: common intention in criminal law casesuslegalforms.com has been visited by 100K+ users in the past month