Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
Malicious prosecution is a common law intentional tort.Like the tort of abuse of process, its elements include (1) intentionally (and maliciously) instituting and pursuing (or causing to be instituted or pursued) a legal action (civil or criminal) that is (2) brought without probable cause and (3) dismissed in favor of the victim of the malicious prosecution.
To commit a criminal offence of ordinary liability (as opposed to strict liability) the prosecution must show both the actus reus (guilty act) and mens rea (guilty mind). A person cannot be guilty of an offence for his actions alone; there must also be the requisite intention, knowledge, recklessness, or criminal negligence at the relevant time.
The headstone of Timothy Evans, who was wrongfully convicted and executed for two murders that had been committed by his neighbour John Christie. A miscarriage of justice occurs when an unfair outcome occurs in a criminal or civil proceeding, [1] such as the conviction and punishment of a person for a crime they did not commit. [2]
Senator (and future Chief Justice) Oliver Ellsworth was the drafter of the Crimes Act. The Crimes Act of 1790 (or the Federal Criminal Code of 1790), [1] formally titled An Act for the Punishment of Certain Crimes Against the United States, defined some of the first federal crimes in the United States and expanded on the criminal procedure provisions of the Judiciary Act of 1789. [2]
Corpus delicti (Latin for "body of the crime"; plural: corpora delicti), in Western law, is the principle that a crime must be proved to have occurred before a person can be convicted of committing that crime. For example, a person cannot be tried for larceny unless it can be proven that property
The city of San Francisco is trying to change the public’s perception of criminals by introducing new language to refer to someone who committed a crime.
Based solely on Diane's testimony, Kevin was convicted of her rape and attempted murder and the second-degree murder of their unborn daughter in spite of witnesses who testified he was at a fast food restaurant during the attack. 16 years later, investigators re-opened the case of the "Bedroom Basher" - a serial killer active in California ...
The scope and breadth of an inmate's ability to bring a DNA-based claim of actual innocence varies greatly from state to state. The Supreme Court has ruled that convicted persons do not have a constitutional due process right to bring DNA-based post-conviction "actual innocence" claims. District Attorney's Office v. Osborne, 557 U.S. 52 (2009 ...