Class Notes (1,100,000)
CA (650,000)
UW (20,000)
LS (500)
LS101 (200)
Lecture

LS101 Lecture Notes - Canada Evidence Act, Narcotic Control Act, Indictable Offence


Department
Legal Studies
Course Code
LS101
Professor
Frances Chapman

This preview shows pages 1-3. to view the full 9 pages of the document.
LS 101 – Oct. 17 18/10/2007 05:36:00
CRIMINAL LAW
Canadian Criminal Code (CCC)
Narcotics Control Act
Division of Powers
Actus Reus
Physical action that constitutes a crime with evidence of that
unlawful conduct (can be minimal e.g. waving down a car while
soliciting for prostitution)
Causation
Can be a continuing act, not just a one-time act e.g. Fagen and
resting car on policeman’s foot
Can also be an omission e.g. neglect
Must be voluntary, from a willing mind
Reasonable person test to what that person expected to
happen/result from their action
Mens Rea
Requirement that a guilty mind accompany the act that constitutes
a crime
Intent to do the act knowing the consequences or proceeded with
reckless disregard (impaired)
Motive – separate from Mens Rea
Subjective/Objective
ACT
INTENT

Only pages 1-3 are available for preview. Some parts have been intentionally blurred.

Actus Reus
Menus Rea
(must be voluntary)
(or OMISSION)
*prohibited harm
*MALA IN SE = Bad in themselves
*MALA PROHIBITA – because the Law says they are wrong
Mens Rea/Mistake of fact – R. v. Ladue
Indignity to a corpse
Sexual relations when he thought Veronica was sleeping, while she
was, in fact, dead
FORMS OF INTENT
1) Intentionally
e.g. incest – S. 155 (1)
2) Recklessness – R. v. Sansregret
S. 433 – damage by fire or explosion to property (arson)
When you foresee it may occur (doesn’t have to be certain)
Indifferent to the consequences
3) Negligence – criminal negligence – S. 219
Everyone is criminally negligent who

Only pages 1-3 are available for preview. Some parts have been intentionally blurred.

oIn doing anything, or
oIn omitting to do anything that is his duty to do,
Shows wanton or reckless disregard for the lives or safety of other
persons
4) Offences of Absolute or Strict Liability
S. 351 – Possession of Break-in Instruments
Burden of Proof
Has to be some degree of moral certainty that this person is guilty
beyond a reasonable doubt
Onus – responsibility to prove guilt/innocence
Presumption of Innocence
Ignorance of the Law
Evidence
Can only testify to what is within their knowledge
No hearsay – only allowed in extremely narrow cases
Voir dire
Pg.151 – R. v. Feaney
Who can be a witness? – Canada Evidence Act (CEA)
oYou do not have to testify against yourself – this cannot have
an adversarial effect on the accused
However, if you do testify, you must answer all
questions honestly
oHusband/wife testimony
Cannot be compelled to disclose any communication
made with one another during the course of their
marriage
You're Reading a Preview

Unlock to view full version