Shopping Bag

0 item(s) in cart/ total: $0    view cart
Free Instant Delivery  |  No Sales Tax
Home > Case Law > Criminal Law  >  Reasonable Man Test
Reasonable Man Test
Reasonable Man Test Cartoons

Reasonable Man Test

Director of Public Prosecutions v. Camplin; the reasonable man standard is a person having the power of self-control to be expected of an ordinary person of the same sex and age as the accused.
Your Price: $10.00

Select Usage (details) :

Related Cartoons

United States v. Diaz
United States v. Diaz
Participant in a conspiracy is criminally liable for all acts that are done by other members in furtherance of the conspiracy and that are reasonably foreseeable as a necessary consequence of the unlawful agreement.
State v. Christy Pontiac-GMC, Inc.
State v. Christy Pontiac-GMC, Inc.
Corporation may be convicted of specific-intent crime when agent of corporation takes illegal acts in furtherance of the corporate business interests; alter ego; commercial crime; corporate crime; legal fiction; specific intent; swindle.
In the Interest of M.T.S.
In the Interest of M.T.S.
Sexual assault consists of any act of sexual penetration done without the affirmative and freely given permission of the victim. Juvenile delinquency.
Boro v. People
Boro v. People
Consent to an act of sexual intercourse will bar prosecution for rape, even when consent was obtained by fraud, if victim knew that she was consenting to an act of sexual intercourse. Fraud in the factum; fraud in the inducement; prohibition.
Clark v. Arizona
Clark v. Arizona
Mott Rule; mental illness short of insanity does not bear on mens rea according to Arizona state Mott Rule; court will not allow evidence of a mental disorder short of insanity as bearing on a defendant's capacity to form specific intent.
M.C. v. Bulgaria
M.C. v. Bulgaria
Essential element of the crime of rape is lack of consent.
Atkins v. Virginia
Atkins v. Virginia
The execution of a mentally retarded person is "cruel and unusual punishment" and therefore violates the Eighth Amendment.
Insanity May Be Proved By Perponderance Of The Evidence
Insanity May Be Proved By Perponderance Of The Evidence
Perez v. Cain; In a federal habeas proceeding, the standard is whether, after viewing evidence in the light most favorable to the prosecution, any rational trier of fact could have found the essential elements of the crime beyond a reasonable doubt.
Question of Possession
Question of Possession
State v. Barger; new technology complicates questions of possession sufficient to establish criminal liability.
Signing With A Fictitious Name
Signing With A Fictitious Name
United States v. Moore; signing for an express mail delivery with a fictitious name violates federal law.
Substantial Factor Test
Substantial Factor Test
Valazquez v. State; but-for test and substantial factor test to determine liability as cause in fact; must also be the proximate cause or no liability.
Honest Services Fraud Doctrine
Honest Services Fraud Doctrine
Skilling v. United States; bribery and kickbacks are honest services fraud, but conflict of interest is not.