When.com Web Search

  1. Ad

    related to: examples of reasonable doubt in criminal cases

Search results

  1. Results From The WOW.Com Content Network
  2. Reasonable doubt - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reasonable_doubt

    Beyond (a) reasonable doubt is a legal standard of proof required to validate a criminal conviction in most adversarial legal systems. [1] It is a higher standard of proof than the standard of balance of probabilities (US English: preponderance of the evidence) commonly used in civil cases because the stakes are much higher in a criminal case: a person found guilty can be deprived of liberty ...

  3. R v Lifchus - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/R_v_Lifchus

    R v Lifchus, [1997] 3 SCR 320 is a leading Supreme Court of Canada decision on the legal basis of the "beyond a reasonable doubt" standard for criminal law.Cory J outlined several core principles of the reasonable doubt standard and provided a list of points that must be explained to a jury when they are to consider the standard.

  4. Coffin v. United States - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coffin_v._United_States

    It is, of necessity, the condition of mind produced by the proof resulting from the evidence in the cause. It is the result of the proof, not the proof itself, whereas the presumption of innocence is one of the instruments of proof, going to bring about the proof from which reasonable doubt arises; thus one is a cause, the other an effect.

  5. During the Season 2 premiere of “ Reasonable Doubt,” Hulu’s legal drama about high-powered criminal defense attorney Jacqueline “Jax” Stewart (Emayatzy Corinealdi), the subject of ...

  6. Diminished responsibility - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Diminished_responsibility

    Diminished capacity is a partial defense to charges that require that the defendant act with a particular state of mind. [1] For example, if the felony murder rule does not apply, first degree murder requires that the state prove beyond a reasonable doubt that the defendant acted with premeditation, deliberation, and the specific intent to kill—all three are necessary elements of the state's ...

  7. The due process clauses require that the burden of proof in criminal cases be placed on the government, and that the quantum of proof be beyond a reasonable doubt. In re Winship (1970) explicitly held that "the Due Process Clause protects the accused against conviction except upon proof beyond a reasonable doubt of every fact necessary to ...

  8. R v W (D) - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/R_v_W_(D)

    First, the main charge, in dealing with the credibility of the accused, the Crown could fail to prove their case beyond a reasonable doubt even if the jury had a doubt about the credibility of the accused's story. Then, on the recharge, the Crown would have failed to discharge its onus only if they believed the evidence of the accused.

  9. United States v. Bagley - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_v._Bagley

    Hughes Anderson Bagley was indicted on 15 counts of violating federal narcotic and firearm statutes in the Western District of Washington in October 1977. In preparation for trial, to be held in December, Bagley's counsel filed a discovery motion that requested information on the witnesses the prosecution intended to call, their criminal records, and any promises made to them in exchange for ...