Multiple Criminal Trials

1973 ◽  
Vol 8 (1) ◽  
pp. 32-90
Author(s):  
Moshe Shalgi
Keyword(s):  
Criminal Law ◽  
Common Law ◽  
The United States ◽  
Criminal Behaviour ◽  
Double Jeopardy ◽  
Criminal Trials ◽  
European Tradition ◽  
Multiple Trials ◽  
The Subject ◽  
The Common

The prohibition against multiple trials for the same matter is a basic principle of criminal law and long a principle deeply rooted in European tradition. Many jurisdictions consider it important enough to deserve inclusion in their constitutions. Nevertheless the relevant provisions have been applied in quite diverse patterns throughout the various common law jurisdictions, and within each of them have developed unsystematically. They have been the subject of severe criticism down to the present time.Three main doctrines have been developed in the common law jurisdictions:(a)Former trial:This is better known in England asautrefois acquitandautrefois convict, and in the United States as double jeopardy. A man can be tried only once for his criminal behaviour. Once a lawful verdict has been rendered he is protected against further prosecution for the same matter. Underautrefois acquitandautrefois convicta verdict must have been formerly pronounced in the matter which is charged in the subsequent indictment. Under double jeopardy it is enough that the defendant has been in jeopardy of conviction (for the same matter) in former proceedings.

scholarly journals The Private Investigator and the Right to Privacy

1969 ◽  
pp. 256 ◽  
Author(s):  
Elaine F. Geddes
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Criminal Law ◽  
Common Law ◽  
The United States ◽  
The Right To Privacy ◽  
Private Investigator ◽  
The Status ◽  
The Common ◽  
The Individual ◽  
The Right

The author examines the law with respect to the status and powers of private investigators and reviews cases in both Canada and the United States involving the activities of private investigators. Possible remedies available against the private investigator, both in tort and criminal law, are reviewed, as well as American cases on the common law of invasion of privacy, Canadian cases under the various provincial Privacy Acts and possible remedies under the Charter of Rights. Privacy is the right of the individual to decide for himself how much of his life, his thoughts, emotions and the facts that are personal to him he will share with others.

scholarly journals Parental Criminal Responsibility for the Misconduct of Their Children: A Consideration

2018 ◽  
Vol 21 ◽  
pp. 1-21
Author(s):  
Charnelle Van der Bijl
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
South African ◽  
Criminal Law ◽  
Criminal Responsibility ◽  
Criminal Liability ◽  
Common Law ◽  
Strict Liability ◽  
The United States ◽  
Parental Responsibility ◽  
The Common

This contribution examines parental criminal responsibility for the delinquent acts of their children.  As South African law has been swayed by legal philosophy of Anglo-American jurisprudence, a comparative analysis is undertaken with the United States of America, where this issue has been addressed legislatively in both civil tort law and criminal law. The reasoning behind the implementation of specific legislation in the United States is that the common law principles are rooted on the principles of individualisation, which does not specifically cater for parental liability.  Parental responsibility laws have been challenged constitutionally over the years in the United States. Critics are of the view that such laws interfere with the rights of parents to raise their children and are a form of cruel punishment. Additional criticism raised is that parental responsibility laws impose strict liability on parents. Furthermore, some misgivings have been shed that many parents face challenges of being single parents or poverty, which will be exacerbated with the imposition of fines or imprisonment for the misconduct of their children. Despite these concerns and criticism, it will be shown that these laws have withstood the challenges over many decades, in the United States, in both the fields of the law of tort and criminal law. The common law of tort provides for the liability of parents for the conduct of their child. However, such conduct must be specifically attributable to a parent’s action or inaction. The purpose behind tort parental responsibility legislation focuses not only on providing monetary compensation by parents where their children are unable to do so, but also aims to encourage parents to provide better supervision of their children.  At the opposite end of the spectrum, the focus of statutory criminalisation tends to remain on criminal liability of parents for failing to protect others from their child, due to a failure in supervision and to prevent juvenile delinquency.  The South African law of delict is briefly contiguously considered in the context of parental responsibility laws. The concept of parental criminal responsibility laws under South African law is then considered and proffered as a useful mechanism to regulate misconduct of children currently falling outside the aegis of the criminal law.

Crime, Compurgation and the Courts of the Medieval Church

1983 ◽  
Vol 1 (1) ◽  
pp. 1-26 ◽  
Author(s):  
R. H. Helmholz
Keyword(s):  
Law Enforcement ◽  
Criminal Law ◽  
Common Law ◽  
Source Material ◽  
Legal Development ◽  
Medieval Church ◽  
History Of ◽  
The Subject ◽  
The Common ◽  
The Relationship

The history of criminal law has claimed an increasing share of the attention of legal and social historians in recent years. Undeterred by Professor Milsom's verdict that in the area of English criminal law, ‘nothing worthwhile was created,’ historians have plunged into the study of doctrine and practice in the common law courts. The attractions of the source material are undoubtedly great. The law is relatively straightforward, at least compared to land litigation. The cases are interesting and sometimes sensational. The subject matter promises rewards in understanding the relationship between social change and legal development. And the study may even be immediately relevant, shedding light on current law enforcement problems.

Strict liability in Commonwealth criminal law

Legal Studies ◽  
1983 ◽  
Vol 3 (2) ◽  
pp. 117-145
Author(s):  
G. L. Peiris
Keyword(s):  
Criminal Law ◽  
Common Law ◽  
Strict Liability ◽  
Mens Rea ◽  
English Court ◽  
American Law ◽  
Criminal Jurisprudence ◽  
The Subject ◽  
The Common ◽  
Moral Blame

It has been observed justly that few legal doctrines have given rise to so vigorous and sustained a conflict of judicial attitudes as the concept of strict penal responsibility. The theory of mens rea which preceded the origins of the common law, is ingrained in English criminal jurisprudence. An English court has asserted that ‘It is contrary to the whole established law of England (unless the legislation on the subject has clearly enacted it) to say that a person can be guilty of a crime in England without a wrongful intent’. In circumstances involving technical guilt bereft of moral blame English judges have looked askance at invocation of the criminal process. The American Law Institute has recently declared that ‘No principle is more broadly accepted than that the criminal law, involving as it does both punishment and condemnation, should be concerned with conduct that is morally reprehensible or culpable’.

Uncommon Law: America's Excessive Criminal Law & Our Common-Law Origins

Daedalus ◽  
2014 ◽  
Vol 143 (3) ◽  
pp. 62-72
Author(s):  
Jonathan Simon
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Criminal Justice ◽  
Criminal Justice System ◽  
Criminal Law ◽  
Social Order ◽  
Justice System ◽  
Common Law ◽  
The United States ◽  
Criminal Courts ◽  
The Common

This essay explores the role that U.S. criminal courts play in shaping the uniquely punitive social order of the United States. U.S. courts have long been defined against the common law of England, from which they emerged. In this essay, I consider the English legacy and suggest that while the United States does draw heavily from common-law traditions, it has also innovated to alter them, a process that has established a criminal justice system even more punitive than that of England.

scholarly journals The Law of Forcible Entry

1969 ◽  
pp. 271
Author(s):  
W. F. Foster ◽  
Joseph E. Magnet
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Criminal Law ◽  
Common Law ◽  
The United States ◽  
Supreme Court Of Canada ◽  
Civil Process ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
The Common ◽  
The Law ◽  
Criminal Matters

The author considers the two contradictory interests which the law on forcible entry must try to harmonize, namely the inviolability of the citizen's dwelling place as against the effective enforcement of the criminal law and civil process. He discusses the common law attitude towards forcible entry in civil and criminal matters and its view of the need for announcement prior to such entry. He also deals with developments in the United States in this area and considers the present state of the law of forcible entry in Canada in the light of the decision of the Supreme Court of Canada in Eccles v. Bourque [197S\ S.C.R. 739.

Rediscovering Blackstone: wpływ Williama Blackstone’a na rozwój amerykańskiej nauki prawa w recepcji Alberta W. Alschulera

2017 ◽  
Vol 15 (2) ◽  
pp. 175-185
Author(s):  
Edyta Sokalska
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
18Th Century ◽  
Common Law ◽  
The United States ◽  
Law School ◽  
Large Measure ◽  
American Colonies ◽  
Late 18Th Century ◽  
American Law ◽  
The Common

The reception of common law in the United States was stimulated by a very popular and influential treatise Commentaries on the Laws of England by Sir William Blackstone, published in the late 18th century. The work of Blackstone strengthened the continued reception of the common law from the American colonies into the constituent states. Because of the large measure of sovereignty of the states, common law had not exactly developed in the same way in every state. Despite the fact that a single common law was originally exported from England to America, a great variety of factors had led to the development of different common law rules in different states. Albert W. Alschuler from University of Chicago Law School is one of the contemporary American professors of law. The part of his works can be assumed as academic historical-legal narrations, especially those concerning Blackstone: Rediscovering Blackstone and Sir William Blackstone and the Shaping of American Law. Alschuler argues that Blackstone’s Commentaries inspired the evolution of American and British law. He introduces not only the profile of William Blackstone, but also examines to which extent the concepts of Blackstone have become the basis for the development of the American legal thought.

The Common Law in Australia: Its Nature and Constitutional Significance

2004 ◽  
Vol 32 (3) ◽  
pp. 337-355 ◽  
Author(s):  
Leslie Zines
Keyword(s):  
Public Policy ◽  
Common Law ◽  
Public Law ◽  
Federal Law ◽  
Contemporary Debate ◽  
Policy Paper ◽  
Law And Policy ◽  
National University ◽  
The Subject ◽  
The Common

This article originally was published as a Law and Policy Paper. The Law and Policy Papers series was established in 1994 by the Centre for International and Public Law in the Faculty of Law, the Australian National University. The series publishes papers contributing to understanding and discussion on matters relating to law and public policy, especially those that are the subject of contemporary debate. In 1999 the papers were published jointly by the Centre for International and Public Law and The Federation Press. This article is reproduced in the Federal Law Review with the permission of the original publishers.

The Trade Mark, Other Product Designations, and Goodwill

2017 ◽  
Author(s):  
Justine Pila
Keyword(s):  
Subject Matter ◽  
Common Law ◽  
Trade Mark ◽  
Geographical Indication ◽  
Passing Off ◽  
Rights Protection ◽  
Essential Properties ◽  
The Subject ◽  
The Common ◽  
The Relationship

This chapter considers the meaning of the terms that appropriately denote the subject matter protectable by registered trade mark and allied rights, including the common law action of passing off. Drawing on the earlier analyses of the objects protectable by patent and copyright, it defines the trade mark, designation of origin, and geographical indication in their current European and UK conception as hybrid inventions/works in the form of purpose-limited expressive objects. It also considers the relationship between the different requirements for trade mark and allied rights protection, and related principles of entitlement. In its conclusion, the legal understandings of trade mark and allied rights subject matter are presented as answers to the questions identified in Chapter 3 concerning the categories and essential properties of the subject matter in question, their method of individuation, and the relationship between and method of establishing their and their tokens’ existence.

Law and Lawyers in the United States: The Common Law under Stress

1967 ◽  
Vol 80 (4) ◽  
pp. 916
Author(s):  
Lord Denning ◽  
Erwin N. Griswold
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Common Law ◽  
The United States ◽  
The Common
Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document