Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
In criminal law, strict liability is liability for which mens rea (Law Latin for "guilty mind") does not have to be proven in relation to one or more elements comprising the actus reus ("guilty act") although intention, recklessness or knowledge may be required in relation to other elements of the offense (Preterintentionally [1] [2] /ultraintentional [3] /versari in re illicita).
an offence of making such a threat as is mentioned in subsection (3)(a) of section 1 of the Internationally Protected Persons Act 1978 and the following offence against a protected person within the meaning of that section, namely, an offence under section 2 of the Explosive Substances Act 1883 of causing an explosion likely to endanger life
In most common law jurisdictions, an element of a crime is one of a set of facts that must all be proven to convict a defendant of a crime. Before a court finds a defendant guilty of a criminal offense, the prosecution must present evidence that, even when opposed by any evidence the defense may choose, is credible and sufficient to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that the defendant committed ...
Osborne v. Ohio, 495 U.S. 103 (1990), is a U.S. Supreme Court case in which the Court held that the First Amendment to the United States Constitution allows states to outlaw the possession, as distinct from the distribution, of child pornography. [1]
Under the Road traffic Act 1988 it is a strict liability offence to drive a vehicle with an alcohol concentration above the prescribed limit). Nevertheless, because of the potentially severe consequences of criminal conviction, judges at common law also sought proof of an intent to do some bad thing, the mens rea or guilty mind .
In criminal law, mens rea (/ ˈ m ɛ n z ˈ r eɪ ə /; Law Latin for "guilty mind" [1]) 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.
Ohio state law allows private citizens to file an affidavit to support criminal charges. [47] However, the actual prosecution is limited to the state. [48] Only prosecutors can present a criminal case to a grand jury. State law was further amended in 2006 to bar judges from issuing arrest warrants in private prosecution cases. [49]
Ohralik v. Ohio State Bar Association, 436 US 447 (1978), [1] was a decision by the Supreme Court of the United States that in-person solicitation of clients by lawyers was not protected speech under the First Amendment of the U.S. Constitution.