Search results
Results From The WOW.Com Content Network
Retroactive application of law is prohibited by the Article 3 of the Polish civil code, and the legal rule prohibiting such retroactive application is commonly memorised as a Latin sentence Lex retro non agit ("A law does not apply retroactively"). The said article, however, allows retroactive application of an Act of Parliament if it is ...
Every ex post facto law must necessarily be retrospective; but every retrospective law is not an ex post facto law: The former, only, are prohibited. Every law that takes away, or impairs, rights vested, agreeably to existing laws, is retrospective, and is generally unjust, and may be oppressive; and it is a good general rule, that a law should ...
The principle of non-retroactivity is widely recognized for international laws such as treaties, [1] although treaties can have retroactive effect if the parties so intend. [2] It is also widely recognized in criminal law, at least to the extent of prohibiting criminal sanctions that were not in place at the time of the crime.
“To date, the state has spent hundreds of thousands of dollars of taxpayer money defending the retroactive application of its sex offender registry law against individuals who were convicted or ...
Stovall was decided on the same day as United States v.Wade and Gilbert v. California, two cases dealing with the Sixth Amendment right to counsel in pretrial stages.The Court observed that the rule of Wade, where the absence of counsel at a post-indictment lineup was held to be a violation of the Sixth Amendment, would dictate the finding of a Sixth Amendment violation in the present case.
It also put forth an argument that law enforcement should not be "faulted for not anticipating Coleman", and Coleman retroactive application would "seriously disrupt the administration of our criminal laws" in citing Johnson v. New Jersey, 384 U.S 719 (1966).
In its 5-3 decision, the court rejected convicted sex offender Herman Gundy's argument that in passing the law, Congress handed too much power to the U.S. attorney general in violation of a ...
Bouie v. City of Columbia, 378 U.S. 347 (1964), was a case in which the US Supreme Court held that due process prohibits retroactive application of any judicial construction of a criminal statute that is unexpected and indefensible by reference to the law that has been expressed prior to the conduct in issue. [1]