Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
The court accepted that "[t]he more substantial the interference with human rights, the more the court will require by way of justification before it is satisfied that the decision is reasonable". This is as long as the decision remains within the range of responses open to a reasonable decision-maker. [26]
The Canadian system of police powers on reasonable and probable grounds is more clearly defined; a tip from an informer reporting a crime is insufficient to establish reasonable and probable grounds. [36] In Australia it depends on the circumstances of the case, rather than on the reasonable and probable grounds itself. [4]
The reasonable suspicion test is usually considered to be of a less stringent standard as compared to the real likelihood of bias test. The reasonable suspicion test is also thought to be applied from the perspective of the public (or in the eyes of a reasonable man), while the real likelihood of bias test is applied from the court's perspective.
The concept of reasonableness has two related meanings in law and political theory: . As a legal norm, it is used "for the assessment of such matters as actions, decisions, and persons, rules and institutions, [and] also arguments and judgments."
Decision analysis (DA) is the discipline comprising the philosophy, methodology, and professional practice necessary to address important decisions in a formal manner. . Decision analysis includes many procedures, methods, and tools for identifying, clearly representing, and formally assessing important aspects of a decision; for prescribing a recommended course of action by applying the ...
The adequate and independent state ground doctrine states that when a litigant petitions the U.S. Supreme Court to review the judgment of a state court which rests upon both federal and non-federal (state) law, the U.S. Supreme Court does not have jurisdiction over the case if the state ground is (1) “adequate” to support the judgment, and ...
Although the statutes addressing competency vary from state to state in the United States, the two elements outlined in the decision are held in common: The defendant must understand the charges against him or her; The defendant must have the ability to aid his or her attorney in his or her own defense. [1] [3] Subsequently, in Godinez v.
The term decision matrix is used to describe a multiple-criteria decision analysis (MCDA) problem. An MCDA problem, where there are M alternative options and each needs to be assessed on N criteria, can be described by the decision matrix which has N rows and M columns, or M × N elements, as shown in the following table.