The statement "The idea of actus reus refers to criminal intent, or the guilty mind" is false because the idea of actus reus does not refer to criminal intent, but rather to the physical act of committing a crime or the failure to act when there is a legal duty to act.
It is the Latin term for "guilty act" and is one of the two elements that must be present for an act to be considered a crime, along with mens rea, which refers to criminal intent or the guilty mind. Both actus reus and mens rea must be proven beyond a reasonable doubt for someone to be convicted of a crime.
Learn more about actus reus https://brainly.com/question/3065381
#SPJ11
What is the concept of Death Penalty in Islam?
The American Bar Association recommends that all felony cases reach disposition within
a. one year of filing.
b. six months of arrest.
c. six months of filing.
d. one year of arrest.
The American Bar Association recommends that all felony cases reach disposition within one year of filing. The American Bar Association's Standards for Criminal Justice establishes that cases that go on for a long time raise issues for all the parties involved.
The accused, victims, witnesses, and their families, as well as society as a whole, may all be affected by the delay of justice. The Standards seek to decrease delays in criminal trials in order to increase the public's trust in the criminal justice system. The Standards aim to ensure that, while due process rights are upheld, criminal cases are dealt with promptly and efficiently by the system. The criminal justice system must work to guarantee that justice is done quickly, efficiently, and fairly, not only for the accused but also for the victim and society. Defendants have the right to a speedy trial under the Sixth Amendment to the United States Constitution. When the criminal justice system is delayed, it harms the system's reputation, creates anxiety, and raises doubts about the legitimacy of the proceedings.
to know about American Bar Association visit:
https://brainly.com/question/28149117
#SPJ11
Name and justify three laws/legislation from the Constitution that protect citizens against the human right violation of safe healthy environment.
Answer:
The Second Amendment gives citizens the right to bear arms. The Third Amendment prohibits the government from quartering troops in private homes, a major grievance during the American Revolution. The Fourth Amendment protects citizens from unreasonable search and seizure.
Explanation:
National Environmental Policy Act, Clean Air Act, and Safe Drinking Water Act, three laws/legislation from the Constitution that protect citizens against the human right violation of safe healthy environment.
National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) - The NEPA mandates that before reaching and approving any decisions, all federal agencies evaluate the impact of their proposed plans and activities on the environment.
The Clean Air Act was the country's first piece of legislation aimed at reducing air pollution. It approved studies into tools and strategies that may be used to keep track of and lessen environmental air pollution.
The Safe Drinking Water Act was enacted in order to set minimum requirements for drinking water that can be considered safe for human consumption.
Learn more about National Environmental Policy Act, here:
https://brainly.com/question/4433750
#SPJ5
who is our creator? toemad, god ,tyler the creator, ni B B a cat
A right is unenumerated if it is
what does the public law regulate
Public law sees on constitutional, administrative and criminal law. Public law is the part of law that governs relations between legal persons and a government.
Also between different institutions within a state, between different branches of government and relations between persons of direct interest to society.
An illustration of a public law?The entitlement to social benefits, which are only available to natural persons and are given by administrative action of the state budget, is a prime illustration of public law. Slippage laws could say to both public and private legislation.
Does it mean in the legal context?Not private; under the control of the government; or belongs to and accessible to the public. It could be referring to a thing, an organization, or something you do.
To know more about Public Law visit:
https://brainly.com/question/29358001
#SPJ1
Men convicted of crimes of passion have ____brain levels
of serotonin than those convicted of premeditated murder.
Answer:
low
Explanation:
What effect does alcohol have on vision? A. It blurs vision. B. It sharpens vision. C. It has no effect on version
Answer:
A. It blurs vision
Answer:alcohol blurs vision
Explanation:
Jose can't wait to buy his first car next month. He imagines that he will make several new friends at school since everyone will want to ride in his car. He is even having a hard time concentrating on filling orders at the restaurant where he works. Does Jose's thinking have an ethical component? Who is most affected by Jose's conduct? *
Answer:
no , jose Is Mostly effected because he is about to buy and As he is Having hard time filling orders He isn't doing his job properly which is affecting the consumers..And there is A high risk of losing job in the way he is hampering his Job to think
Jose the time thinking about the car, and time loses their job at the restaurant.
What is the restaurant?
A “restaurant” is a location where people eat food. Waiters offered services in the restaurant, and customers ordered food. People exchange services with the help of money. Customers are drawn in by the restaurant's atmosphere, service, and food. A restaurant is the provided the food with cleanliness and more hygiene.
Jose largely affected himself because he did not take care of the job. Jose was constantly concerned that the new car was not working well at her job. Most customers are hardly impacted. As a result, Jose was impacted whenever he lost his job at the restaurant.
As a result, Jose impacted himself because he all the time thinking for the new car. He was the not 100% concentrate her job are more chances to loss her restaurant job.
Learn more about the restaurant, here:
https://brainly.com/question/27316334
#SPJ2
explain the three competenes that are expected from ideal citizens?
Answer:
Obeying the laws, loving your country and your fellow citizens, and working hard to make your country a better place
Explanation:
Hope this helps :)
pls mark as brainliest :3
And have an amazing day <3
the separate but equal doctrine in plessy v ferguson was overturned in public schools by A. the second amendment B. Brown v Board of Education C. Marbury v Madison D. Miranda v Arizona
Answer:
B
Explanation:
under the residential mortgage lending act, the minimum surety bond required is_____.
Under the residential mortgage lending act, the minimum surety bond required is 0.5% of the aggregate loan amount.
The Residential Mortgage Lending Act may have different minimum surety bond requirements. State specific legislation known as the Residential Mortgage Lending Act controls mortgage lending practices in that state. As a result, there may be regional variations in the minimum surety bond requirement. To ascertain the precise minimum surety bond amount that is required for mortgage lenders operating within that jurisdiction.
According to the Residential Mortgage Lending Act the bond must equal 0.5% of the total loan amount of residential mortgage loans that were originated in the year before.
Learn more about residential mortgage at:
brainly.com/question/33116872
#SPJ4
If one of the outstanding class-action lawsuits against a Canadian gig employer were to be found in favour of the plaintiffs (i.e. in favour of the gig workers suing their employers), the employer would likely be responsible for paying retroactively for various rights these workers had that were not fulfilled. Briefly describe the types of payments these employers would find themselves owing to their workers.
The types of payments employers would have to make if they were found liable in a class-action lawsuit in favour of their gig workers would vary, depending on the specific employment terms it violated.
The employer could be responsible for calculating and paying back wages for the hours worked, since typically gig workers are paid “by the job” or project completion without taking accrued vacation time or overtime into account.
They might be on the hook for unpaid overtime or vacation pay, as well as for other entitlements such as holiday pay, employer-paid contributions to pension plans, and medical and/or dental benefits. If the employer had been in violation of health and safety laws, they could also be out of pocket for medical expenses, as well as for any damages suffered by the employee, such as pain and suffering or loss of income.
To know more about employment , click here:
https://brainly.com/question/17459074
#SPJ4
One required element of a crime is that the perpetrator has a “guilty mind” when committing the crime. This means there is an intention to do something wrong. In what ways might it be possible to prove that someone had a “guilty mind” when they committed an illegal act?
A way that can be used to refer to the fact that a person had guilty mind when they committed a crime is from the fact that they knew the implication of the thing that they have done.
What is meant by guilty mind?Mens rea, or "guilty mind," is the mental component of an individual's intention to commit a crime or knowledge that an individual's action or inaction will result in a criminal being committed. It is a need for numerous crimes. A crime is made up of the mens rea and actus reus.
What constitutes committing a crime?Components of Crime
Every crime normally consists of three components: the act or conduct (actus reus); the person's mental state at the moment of the act; and the causation between the act and the effect (typically either proximate causation or but-for causation). Hence we would say that the guilty mind exists because of the known implication of the actions.
Read more on crime here: https://brainly.com/question/6203610
#SPJ1
Discuss whether mandatory sentencing options should exist for most crimes, or whether judges should be allowed to use their discretion. Explain.
Answer:
Mandatory sentencing is inherently unfair and inaccurate. We place judges in a position to weigh the scales of justice, but take all discretion from their hands. Additionally, it presents a problem of bias that often. ore seriously affects minorities.
How is a student loan different from a scholarship? A student loan must be paid back, but a scholarship is not paid back. A scholarship must be paid back, but a student loan is not paid back. A student loan is a form of financial aid, but a scholarship is not. A scholarship is a form of financial aid, but a student loan is not.
Student loan different from a scholarship because: A student loan must be paid back, but a scholarship is not paid back.
Student Loan and scholarshipStudent loan can be defined as borrowing or lending money to cover your school expenses while scholarship is a financial aid or financial assistance to cover your school expenses.
When you borrowed money you are expected to payback but when it comes to scholarship you are not expected to pay back because the money given to you was free.
Inconclusion Student loan different from a scholarship because: A student loan must be paid back, but a scholarship is not paid back.
Learn more about Student Loan and scholarship here:https://brainly.com/question/488893
Which level of government establish and implement educations requirements for minors?
I
U.S. Government
II
Government of the State of Florida
III
County and Municipal governments
Answer:
Explanation:
The US government did
4. How are interviews and interrogations distinguished from each other?
Answer:
The goal of an interview is usually to get a job and have very reasonable and formal questions about one's expertise, such as why should we let you in on this job or what is your level of experience in this area of expertise. However, it can also be to film a documentary or get to know somebody better, and both are conducted by people who have interviewed people many times. Interrogations are also formal and performed by experts, but they are usually strict and operated as a punishment or asking questions with the consequence of a penalty if answered suspiciously or incorrectly.
Imagine you are a typical judge. After college, you went to law school. Then you passed a difficult bar exam to be licensed to practice law. After that, you spent years prosecuting or defending criminal cases. You have been involved in thousands of criminal trials. As a judge, should you be free to make any sentencing decision you want? Or should you be required to pick from a limited range of sentences for each offense? Explain why you think your selection makes the most sense.
Answer:
As a judge, you should be required to pick from a limited range of sentences for each offense.
Explanation:
Some may argue that having passed a difficult bar exam to be licensed to practice law, spending years prosecuting or defending criminal cases, and being involved in thousands of criminal trials should qualify a judge to be free to make any sentencing decision they want—but this notion is incorrect.
Although judges tend to be extremely experienced and highly intelligent, granting judges too much leeway in sentencing decisions leads to issues like sentencing disparity (disproportionate sentencing in similar cases). Before the passage of the Sentencing Reform Act (SRA) in 1984, sentencing disparities within the United States justice system were largely unaddressed, so the SRA sought to address sentencing disparities with the imposition of mandatory sentencing guidelines for federal sentences. However, the SRA limited the power of judges to a great extent, an issue that would be addressed in the United States v. Booker (2005) Supreme Court case, with the court ruling the sentencing guidelines imposed by the SRA be deemed advisory rather than mandatory. What can be learned from these legal developments is that sentencing guidelines are necessary for reducing disparity within the justice system, but should remain advisory so as to not place any excessive limitations on the authority or sentencing liberty of judges.
The closest answer to the Supreme Court's legal precedent—our ideal in this case—would be picking from a limited range of sentences for each offense rather than having no limitations at all, as the latter would likely result in a return to the non-uniform, disparity-ridden justice system seen before the passage of the SRA.
Explain how the prompt below is an example of checks and balances between the three branches of government. “You just got pulled over by a police officer. He writes you a ticket for texting while driving. The only problem is you didn’t have your cellphone at the time, because you lost your phone on vacation with your family the week prior! There is nothing you can do in the moment about receiving the ticket, but... there is something you can do about having to pay the fine. In fact you may be a like to have the ticket removed from your record altogether!” Explain below how checks and balances may save your wallet money and your driving record.
Answer:Cause they can’t check it and if your doing good it helps
Explanation:
did you know firefighter uniforms can withstand up to 1,200 degrees Fahrenheit
Answer:
Wait is that true? if so thats freakin gnarly. They must be freakin hot under all that
Answer:
yes ik that and all the gear they have to wear 75 pounds
Explanation:
Which of the following negatively affects the government's expenditure on various future obligations?
A surplus in the government revenue
Inflation in the economy
Lags in government policies
Interest on borrowed funds
Fluctuations in the business cycle
Interest on borrowed funds negatively affects the government's expenditure on various future obligations. Thus, option (d) is correct.
The cost of interest on borrowed money increases the government's debt and lowers the amount of money available to meet future obligations when the government borrows money.
Government spending on various future responsibilities may not necessarily be negatively impacted by a surplus in revenue, economic inflation, delays in implementing government plans, and business cycle swings.
Therefore, option (d) is correct.
Learn more about on government, here:
https://brainly.com/question/4160287
#SPJ12
_______ is when someone has some sort of mental or physical defect that prevents him or her from being able to enter into a legally binding contract.
The term you are looking for is "incapacity". Incapacity refers to the inability of an individual to make informed decisions due to some kind of mental or physical defect. This incapacity can be temporary or permanent and can affect an individual's ability to understand the nature of a contract, its terms, and its implications.
In the context of contract law, incapacity means that the affected individual is not legally competent to enter into a contract, and any contract entered into by them may be considered void or unenforceable.
Mental incapacity can arise due to a variety of factors such as mental illness, cognitive impairment, intellectual disability, and even intoxication. Physical incapacity can arise due to factors such as injury, illness, or disability. In such cases, a court may appoint a legal guardian or conservator to act on behalf of the incapacitated individual and make legal decisions for them.
It is important to note that the determination of incapacity is not always straightforward and may require a formal evaluation by a medical or legal expert. The law generally seeks to protect individuals with mental or physical incapacity from being exploited or taken advantage of, especially in contractual relationships. Therefore, it is essential to be aware of these issues when entering into any contractual agreement.
Learn more about physical defect here:
https://brainly.com/question/29796206
#SPJ11
which legal rule will not impose punitive damages on a master for the torts of his servants unless the master himself took some part in the wrongful action?
The legal rule that will not impose punitive damages on a master for the torts of his servants unless the master himself took some part in the wrongful action is known as the "Respondeat Superior" rule.
What is the "Respondeat Superior" rule?Respondeat superior is a legal term that means "let the superior answer." It is a legal doctrine that holds an employer or principal responsible for the wrongful acts of its employees or agents, acting within the scope of their employment or agency, even if the employer or principal did not participate in or approve of the act in question.
The purpose of the rule is to promote workplace safety by making employers financially responsible for the negligent acts of their employees. It also helps to ensure that individuals who are injured as a result of an employee's negligence can recover compensation for their injuries. However, the rule does not apply to intentional torts or criminal acts committed by employees outside the scope of their employment.
To know more about Respondeat Superior refer here:
https://brainly.com/question/23416700
#SPJ11
A Segway is a vehicle according to Florida law true or false
Answer:
flase
Explanation:
can u be forced to retain 9th grade?
How was the political world also tied to personal life in the Classical world? Also, how was personal life also political in the Classical world? Compare examples from at least two societies (Persia, Rome, Athens or Early Christianity). If needed you can choose multiple societies.
In the Classical world, the political and personal realms were deeply interconnected, with the actions and decisions of individuals having significant implications on both spheres. The intertwining of politics and personal life can be observed in various Classical societies, including Persia, Rome, Athens, and Early Christianity.
In Persia, the political world was closely tied to personal life through the concept of kingship. The Persian king, known as the Shah or Emperor, held absolute power and was considered the embodiment of divine authority. Personal loyalty and obedience to the king were highly valued, and failure to demonstrate loyalty could result in severe consequences. The personal lives of individuals were therefore heavily influenced by their allegiance to the political order, as any perceived disloyalty could lead to loss of status, exile, or even execution. Similarly, in Rome, personal life was intertwined with politics, particularly among the ruling elite. The concept of "mos maiorum" emphasized the importance of upholding traditional Roman values and social norms. The political success and reputation of individuals often depended on their adherence to these societal expectations in their personal conduct, such as maintaining strong family ties, demonstrating virtuous behavior, and fulfilling public duties. Personal scandals or moral transgressions could have detrimental effects on one's political standing and aspirations for office.In Athens, personal life was also political in nature, especially for male citizens who actively participated in the democratic system. Athenian citizens were expected to engage in public affairs, attend assemblies, and serve in various civic roles. The political participation of individuals was closely tied to their personal reputation and honor within the community. The ability to deliver persuasive speeches, form alliances, and gain the trust of fellow citizens played crucial roles in shaping one's political influence. Additionally, decisions made within the family unit, such as the selection of marriage partners or the upbringing of children, could have political implications, as alliances and connections formed through familial ties could influence political networks.
In Early Christianity, personal life was intertwined with politics through the establishment of a distinct religious community with its own moral codes and expectations. Early Christians faced persecution and oppression from the Roman Empire, which sought to suppress the growth of this new religious movement. The personal beliefs and practices of Christians often clashed with the dominant political and social norms of the time, leading to conflicts and tensions. Personal decisions to adhere to Christian teachings, participate in communal rituals, or openly identify as Christians were inherently political acts that challenged the established order.
Overall, in the Classical world, the political and personal spheres were intimately connected. Loyalty to rulers, adherence to societal norms, political participation, and religious affiliations all influenced personal lives and vice versa. The examples of Persia, Rome, Athens, and Early Christianity demonstrate the complex interplay between politics and personal life, highlighting how individual actions and choices carried broader political significance in these societies.
To know more about Classical world, click here https://brainly.com/question/5338138
#SPJ11
in their oversight role with regard to the bureaucracy, the courts tend to support ______.
In their oversight role with regard to the bureaucracy, the courts tend to support individual rights.
This is because the courts are responsible for interpreting the Constitution and ensuring that the government acts in accordance with its provisions. When citizens believe that their rights have been violated by bureaucratic actions, they can bring their case to court.
If the court finds that the bureaucracy has overstepped its bounds and violated the individual's rights, it can order the bureaucracy to cease its actions or take corrective action. This helps to ensure that the bureaucracy operates within the bounds of the law and respects the rights of citizens.
The courts play an important role in upholding the principles of democracy by holding the bureaucracy accountable for its actions and protecting individual rights.
To know more about individual rights, refer here:
https://brainly.com/question/14316517#
#SPJ11
The term “Big House” originated _____.
Answer:
because prisons had grown to very large sizes to accommodate more prisoners
Explanation:
Just took the test
2. Why do you think mandatory minimum punishment sentencing dont have the deterrent
effect that they were created to prove?
Answer:
Minimum sentencing does not have the deterrent effect it was created to have because, it is punishing individuals on a set scale and not on the circumstances of the case.
Explanation: