Test 2 Flashcards
(39 cards)
what are the substantive issues with the kloubakov case?
material benefit and procuring
what was the material benefit and procuring in the kloubakov case?
- provision of services (e.g., tylenol and spa) deemed exploitative
- “material benefit” refers to receiving financial or other tangible gain
- “procuring” means actively inducing or persuading someone to engage in prostitution
what were the retrial grounds in the kloubakov case?
lower court’s broad interpretation overturned; convictions reinstated
what section of the charter was challenged in the kloubakov case?
section 7 (life, liberty, and security of the person). courts argues the these provisions do not apply or protect sex workers
what are the basic provisions in the bedford case?
- bawdy house
- living on the avails
- communication
bawdy case section
210
avails provisions
212
communications provision
213
what are the substantive issues in the bedford case?
- CCC overstretched: criminalize more people than save them
- Not to propogate more exploitation: how can we uphold their CRF and protect the prostitutes while punishing the buyers
what was the outcome of the bedford case?
new criminal prostitution law (Bill C-36, 2014) restricting sec work
what were the facts of the stephan case?
parents were charged with failing to provide necessaries of life to their child
what is hindsight bias?
when looking back, after mistakes have already been made, leading to disastrous outcomes, one finds that the doctor must have been negligent t/f guilty (mens rea and actus reus satisfied)
courts must avoid judging past decisions with current knowledge
what is marked departure?
a standard used to assess negligence in criminal cases
what are the 3 elements of actus reus?
- conduct: a voluntary act or omission constituting the central feature of the crime
- the surrounding ‘material’ circumstances
- the consequences of the voluntary conduct
what are the facts of the morrison case?
craigslist child grooming case
how was the law unconstitutional in the morrison case?
- law presumes an accused knows age
- imposing presumption of guillt h/e it was upheld that the accused try to check the age of the person
- crown argues that the law is designed to protect vulnerable children and minimum sentences are constitutional
what did the appeal courts argue in the morrison case? then what did the SCC say in response?
- sides with morrison that minimum sentence of 12 months is grossly disproportionate for some individuals
- SCC holds that the law is clear in its objective
what did the SCC conclude in the morrison case?
courts uphed the 4-month sentence because morrison failed to take reasonable steps to ensure the other person was over 18
what are arbitrary laws?
- disconnect between the limit on liberty and the objective of the prohibition
- capricious: may lead to abuse of power by the state whith no rational basis and does not permit flexibility and chance in cricumstances and context
what are vague laws?
- when a law fails to detail the practices to the ordinary citizen what are required or prohibitied
- “guessing game”: defined on case-by-case basis and undermines the security of citizens
what are some examples of vague law?
- loitering
- public nuisance
what is an overboard law?
- when laws stretch their objective
- obscure state’s improper purpose for regulating expression, creating ‘speech bubbles’ (anti-hate legislation)
what is a grossly disproportionate law?
- when a law cases a harm that is much more severe than the objective that the law seeks to address
- ignores the context and may bring harm and injury to groups
what is contextualism and invariantism?
- determines how we interpret laws
- contextualism allows one to address the context of when the law was made and the other does not
