Exam Review
· Earliest sets of written laws - Code of Hammurabi, Mosaic Law, Roman Law, Justinian's Code, Magna Carta, Napoleonic Code, Geneva, UNDHR
· Precedents in court proceedings - similar fact cases must be judged similarly - often a precedent setting case changes laws.
· How are laws created in Canada, in particular what happens in the House of Commons? - our elected officials modify laws, create laws.
· There are some defences to negligence cases including
voluntary assumption of risk - reasonable people assume some risk involved with certain activities, e.g. sports, attending events
inevitable accident - "act of God"
· What are hybrid, indictable, and summary criminal offences?
Indictable - most serious type of offence, you'll likely see a judge before you're released.
Summary - least serious, no need to see a judge, probably a fine, ticket
Hybrid - can be charged as indictable or summary - the Crown decides, often on the advice of the police.
· What are examples of each type of criminal offence?
Crimes against people - various levels of assault, various levels of homicide.
Crimes against property - fraud, theft, break and enter, nuisance (vandalism), arson,
Crimes against public morals - activities around prostitution, gambling, narcotics.
· What are your rights upon arrest as outlined in the Charter of Rights, s. 10?
Informed of why you're under arrest.
Get a lawyer and be told that you can have a lawyer.
Habeas corpus - get bail if you're not a further threat.
Innocent until Proven Guilty.
Notably, you do NOT have the right to remain silent (in the USA you have that right).
· What are some examples of the goals of sentencing?
Rehabilitation - to rehabilitate the criminal
General Deterrence - to convince, deter etc. the general public from committing similar crimes.
Specific Deterrence - to convince, deter the criminal him/herself from committing similar crimes.
To note, Youth Criminals - the emphasis is always on rehabilitation.
· What are some sentences for the various types of homicides?
1st Degree Murder is Life in Prison with no parole for 25 years. Usually people are eligible to apply for parole after 1/3 of their sentence has been served.
· What are and when can an accused use these defences to a criminal offence.
· Mental Illness - for severe crimes only (generally murder)
· Alibi - to prove you were somewhere else during a crime, and therefore cannot possibly have done it.
· Insanity - no longer a defence in Canada, it's now called Mental Illness.
· Automatism - e.g. sleep-walking. When a person is unable to control their own action.
· Entrapment - when the police help or encourage a person to commit a crime.
· Duress - generally when someone is threatened with severe harm at the time (or very close to it) he/she commits the criminal act.
· Consent - often used in fights, sports violence, sexual crimes - it's when an accused says that the victim actually consented to the violence.
· Double Jeopardy - once acquitted or convicted of a crime, you cannot be charged against for the same crime.
· TORT law includes what other areas of law?
· Exactly what elements are considered in an action of Intentional Tort -
- Intentional Tort (harm)
- Injury - real harm (serious) occurred
- Causation - the intent to harm and the actions take resulted in the harm claimed
- Damages - harm can be compensated for with $$
What must be proven to prove a negligence claim?
- Negligence, insufficient care was taken by the defendant
- Causation - the negligence action or inaction resulted in the harm/damages claimed
- Damages - actual loss or harm or damages that can be compensated for with $$
- Duty of Care - does the defendant owe the victim an obligation to exercise care to prevent the harm actually done.
Standard of Care - what a reasonable person would expect for the level of care owed to the victim.
· Under the Youth Criminal Justice Act, what rights to privacy do offenders have?
- Unless a serious offence, youth criminals' identities cannot be published. This is to enhance their chances of rehabilitation and to limit the other damaging effects of being a criminal, e.g. work, family, education.
Part 2
TWO short answer questions regarding cases that are presented to you. They are each worth 15 marks (of a 90 mark exam) and involve the following parts of law:
1. Extenuating circumstances surrounding a murder trial. What may judges consider when sentencing convicted murderers?
Elements of a Crime -
Actus Reus - criminal action ("guilty action")
Mens Rea - criminal intent ("guilty mind")
Conditions for a Crime -
1. Society considers the action/behaviour to be immoral or wrong.
2. The action must cause harm to the victims or society in general.
3. The harm must be severe in nature.
4. The criminal justice system is an appropriate way to punish the criminal.
Defenses -
Consider for this case the defenses of automatism and duress.
Early in the course we looked at three different ways (philosophies) of dealing with the law.
Natural Law - in the natural world circumstances will often dictate the outcome of a situation. e.g. if you are stuck in a cave for a month, you'll probably die of dehydration or starvation. For some people God plays a role and for them it's quite natural.
Positivist - this is when the "letter of the law" is the only thing considered, where actions and consequences are considered in either/or fashion, "black or white". Outside circumstances are not considered.
Realist - this is where all circumstances, including natural law circumstances, are considered when judging a case. Things like motivations for actions and wider implications of sentencing (e.g. no mom/dad at home with kids if mom/dad are in jail) are considered.
Elements of a Crime -
Actus Reus - criminal action ("guilty action")
Mens Rea - criminal intent ("guilty mind")
Conditions for a Crime -
1. Society considers the action/behaviour to be immoral or wrong.
2. The action must cause harm to the victims or society in general.
3. The harm must be severe in nature.
4. The criminal justice system is an appropriate way to punish the criminal.
Defenses -
Consider for this case the defenses of automatism and duress.
Early in the course we looked at three different ways (philosophies) of dealing with the law.
Natural Law - in the natural world circumstances will often dictate the outcome of a situation. e.g. if you are stuck in a cave for a month, you'll probably die of dehydration or starvation. For some people God plays a role and for them it's quite natural.
Positivist - this is when the "letter of the law" is the only thing considered, where actions and consequences are considered in either/or fashion, "black or white". Outside circumstances are not considered.
Realist - this is where all circumstances, including natural law circumstances, are considered when judging a case. Things like motivations for actions and wider implications of sentencing (e.g. no mom/dad at home with kids if mom/dad are in jail) are considered.
2. When a person is contracted to commit an illegal act and it goes horribly wrong with consequences and injuries to others far beyond what was originally intended, what legal steps should the police and the judicial system take to bring the perpetrators to justice?
In a case like this, you should consider the circumstances as listed for Question 1 above, but for defences you might consider Mistake (but that's very weak).
In a case like this, you should consider the circumstances as listed for Question 1 above, but for defences you might consider Mistake (but that's very weak).
Part 3
For the long answer essay question I provide you with a short reading about a case. You are to comment on the reading using, primarily, supporting evidence from the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms. You should review it so that you are familiar with it – I will provide you with a copy for the exam so you do NOT need to memorize it.
For this question you should make a skeleton outline before writing. In your outline list:
EXACTLY which parts of the Charter apply.
EXACTLY which parts of Criminal Law apply.
Then do a short outline of each paragraph including the intro and conclusion - do this will dot jots of the main points you'll raise INCLUDING the parts of law (Charter or Criminal Code) that apply.
An Intro should INCLUDE the points of law that you'll be using AND it should include the opinion that you will be proving.
Each body paragraph should have a topic sentence (the point you'll be making), proof (points of law), discussion and then the last sentence should connect the paragraph DIRECTLY with one of the points in your introduction.
Conclusion should sum up the points your made and it should have a final statement connecting the body of your paper to the introduction (your opinion).
No comments:
Post a Comment