New answers tagged criminal-law
-1
In North Carolina NC Gen. Stat 14-12.3 prohibits certain secret societies, namely those whose purpose is to violate or circumvent laws of the state.
It shall be unlawful for any person to join, unite himself with,
become a member of, apply for membership in, form, organize, solicit
members for, combine and agree with any person or persons to form or
...
0
They are legal on the face of it but very hard to regulate as they have to be shown to exist to begin with and have a discernable effect.
Although there have been attempts like the Unlawful Societies Act 1799 or the declarations requirements for Masons (phased out in England but still applicable in Scotland particularly for the Scottish Parliament and ...
1
Under California Health and Safety Code 11361, what constitutes “inducing a minor to use marijuana”?
"Induce" means "bring about", It is left to the fact finder (juror) to decide if the accused's action "brought about" the minor's violation of the law. If the minor habitually violated the law on his own and only incidentally happened to be in the presence of a pot-smoking adult, a reasonable juror would not find that the adult ...
1
Conviction for a crime is never automatic, there must be a trial. The remaining accused can be tried and convicted or acquitted based on whatever evidence there is. If you flee the US, you can return (these guys are presumed to be US citizens): you may or may not (probably will) be prosecuted upon your return. Or, the accused could be extradited from ...
2
The test for child abuse is a broadly worded "standard" that is applied in the discretion of the judge or jury, as the case may be, on a case by case basis. But, it is very unlikely that this would considered to meet the test for abuse.
Federal legislation provides guidance to States by identifying a minimum set of acts or behaviors that define ...
6
Rolfe and his partner should have apprehended Garrett using non-lethal force, or else just let him get away.
In Tennessee v. Garner, 471 U.S. 1 (1985):
[Deadly] force may not be used unless necessary to prevent the escape and the officer has probable cause to believe that the suspect poses a significant threat of death or serious physical injury to the ...
4
In Tennessee v. Garner, 471 U.S. 1 (1985), the Supreme Court held that, under the Fourth Amendment, when a law enforcement officer is pursuing a fleeing suspect, the officer may not use deadly force to prevent escape unless "the officer has probable cause to believe that the suspect poses a significant threat of death or serious physical injury to the ...
1
The death was made to look like a suicide - but the death actually was suicide, as it turns out. The alibi given to police was, presumably, technically true (person A likely was out of town at the time of death.) Although there was intent to mislead the officer, what misleading was actually done?
The Wisconsin law for obstructing an officer says:
(1) ...
3
RCW 9.41.280 prohibits firearms and "dangerous weapons", which does not extend to a tiny knife. Seattle Public Schools does not add anything relevant above state law, nor does Renton, nor Bellevue. Bellevue just says "knives" which is broader than state law, but they refer the question to state law, and such a "knife" would not ...
2
You can read the relevant law, 18 USC 715. That law defines "Golden Eagle Insignia" as
the words “The Golden Eagle” and the representation of an American
Golden Eagle (colored gold) and a family group (colored midnight blue)
enclosed within a circle (colored white with a midnight blue border)
framed by a rounded triangle (colored gold with a ...
0
It's copyrighted, so no, you can't use it. You'll need to get permission from the person who created it.
The caveat is, if this was a government work you can use it, but you'll have to determine that based on the original source.
0
for that particular Country you are visiting (and as long as you are present in that Country), is it an imprisonable Felony for Residents and Visitors alike to have a Bitcoin account anywhere in the World?
It largely depends on (1) the terms of the enacted law, (2) the legislative intent thereof, (3) the constitutionality of that law, and (4) its ...
0
It usually depends on the law in question. For the most part countries don't worry about what non-citizens get up to abroad. If you steal a car in France you are not going to be prosecuted by Japan if you should travel there, even though theft is a crime in both countries. However if you are in country X and trade bitcoins with someone in country Y in ...
0
Yes
When you enter the jurisdiction of a country, you are subject to its laws.
You are not, in general, subject to punishment for things you did before you entered its jurisdiction but if possession of bitcoin ( or anything else)is illegal in that country, then possessing that thing makes you subject to prosecution.
1
Is a contracted business consultant, a salaried academic futurist, a serious (not for entertainment or amusement) war game player who's in the military and thus paid, a buddy for whom you bought a few drinks who predicts the outcome of a game on TV, an investment advisor on commission so you'll make a fortune, an insurance company accepting premiums, a NASA ...
8
No. The government generally has no duty to protect private citizens from each other.
It was different facts but basically the same question in DeShaney v. Winnebago Cty. DSS, 489 U.S. 189 (1989), where the Supreme Court held:
A State's failure to protect an individual against private violence generally does not constitute a violation of the Due Process ...
2
There appears to be no general federal statute addressing the legality of a male entering a female-labeled bathroom, or vice versa, within federal jurisdiction. There are various regulations that touch on bathrooms, for example the OSHA regulations pertaining to sanitation require that "toilet facilities, in toilet rooms separate for each sex, shall be ...
2
In the UK you must have an "insurable interest" in the thing you want to insure. This means you would suffer a financial or other kind of loss if the thing were lost or damaged. You can't take out insurance on things in which you don't have an insurable interest - or the policy would be invalid if you did.
So you can get life insurance for your spouse and ...
0
You don't cede control
You can't "alienate control of your body" - for example, a provision "Bob is allowed to kill me if certain conditions apply" would not be a legal contract. In euthanasia, where it's legal (and in most places it's not) you don't cede control or decisions. If you agree to assisted euthanasia, you just have someone else execute your ...
2
What is the legal distinction? Since slavery is just giving up control or allowing force against a body isnt that the same?
Once enslaved, you will still be alive and therefore might change your mind, but you won't have the legal freedom to go back. This is a problem as, in a free society, you ought to have the ability to.
In case of euthanasia you will be ...
Top 50 recent answers are included
