A book that students find interesting and instructors consider educationally valuable, the Fifth Edition of Contemporary Criminal Law combines traditional concepts with thought-provoking cases and engaging learning tools. The text covers both foundational and emerging legal topics such as terrorism, gangs, cybercrime, and hate crimes, illustrated by real-life examples that students connect with. Clear explanations of criminal law and defenses are complemented by provocative, well-edited cases followed by discussion questions to stimulate critical thinking and in-class discussion.
The book provides a contemporary perspective on criminal law that encourages students to actively read and analyze the text. The basic principles of international law are described and examined with reference to the principal sources of international law.
This examination, however, takes place within the context of South African law. South African state practice, judicial decisions and legislation on international law receive equal treatment with international law as it is practised and taught abroad. The present work is designed to assist judicial officers and practitioners, educate students, and guide diplomats in the intricacies of international law both at home in South Africa and abroad.
This fourth edition considers both international and South African sources and provides an expanded focus on an array of topics, including secession, immunities of senior officials for international crimes, diplomatic protection, universal jurisdiction, the responsibility of international organizations, reservations to treaties, the Human Rights Council, the SADC Tribunal, the responsibility to protect, a review of Security Council action, self-defense against terrorism, the definition of aggression in the Statute of the International Criminal Court, the jurisprudence of the International Criminal Court, the African Court of Human Rights, and the protection of civilians in armed conflict.
Soons, scholar and practitioner of international law, this Liber Amicorum identifies gaps or 'wrong norms' in specific fields of international law, and addresses the fundamental question of what is wrong with international law as a system for creatiing global public order.
Email address. Your personal data will be used to support your experience throughout this website, to manage access to your account, and for other purposes described in our privacy policy. With Instant Delivery. This is a Test Bank Study Questions to help you better prepare for your exams.
Related products Sale Add to wishlist. Planting a garden within a fenced backyard d. The holding in Chaplinsky v. New Hampshire is. In which case did the US Supreme Court decline to ban the carrying of firearms in sensitive places such as schools and government buildings and decline to prohibit gun sales to felons and the mentally challenged but allow states to regulate in these categories as they desire.
McDonald v. District of Columbia v. Heller c. Moore v. Madigan d. Kachalsky v. Which is this case? Chicago b. James lives in Chicago where parking can be difficult to find. James drives his car to work daily. After arriving home from work he was unable to find a parking space on the street and so he parked in an alleyway behind his home as he had done many times before.
The next day, while James is at work, legislation passes to ban parking in alleyways for safety reasons. When he arrives at home he is easily able to find a parking space on the street directly in front of his property. As he is preparing dinner an officer appears at his front door and writes him a ticket based on the newly enacted law and the fact that the previous night, before the law was enacted, he had parked in the alley.
Which statement applies? This is an example of an ex post facto law and it is improper to hold James accountable for actions legal at the time they were committed. This is an example of a bill of attainder and it is improper to hold James accountable for actions legal at the time they were committed. This is an example of an ex post facto law and it is proper to hold James accountable for actions legal at the time they were committed. This is an example of a bill of attainder and it is proper to hold James accountable for actions legal at the time they were committed.
Which is a requirement of due process? Individuals must receive notice of criminal conduct b. Police must have definite standards to ensure uniformity of enforcement c. All of the above e. Adnon is arrested for possessing a firearm in his vehicle.
He believes he is within his rights. What may he rely on in his defense? The Second Amendment c. Ex post facto laws d. Timothy is a recent high school graduate. A few years ago his parents got divorced, his house was foreclosed on, and he and his mother were forced to move to a trailer park.
He applied to a nearby state university in hope to continue his studies but he was denied. He believes he was denied admittance because he comes from a poor family. If he challenges this decision as an equal protection violation, what test will be used?
Rational basis c. Strict scrutiny d. A new ordinance limits habitation on certain streets to ethnic minorities to preserve culture and heritage. Little italy, chinatown, little india, etc. Jillian wishes to move to chinatown to be close to her favorite restaurants but the ordinance prohibits this.
If challenged as an equal protection violation, which standard is appropriate? The ordinance is presumed valid so long as it is rationally related to a constitutionally permissible state interest. The ordinance must be substantially related to an important government objective. The ordinance must be strictly necessary and there must be no alternative approach to advancing a compelling state interest.
The ordinance must be logically related to a historic interest beyond a reasonable doubt Answer Location: Equal Protection Learning Objective: 1. A system of government in which governmental power is limited by the constitution is what type of government?
Tyranny b. Republic c. Constitutional democracy. Answer Location: Introduction Learning Objective: 1. Their faith dictates that they not participate in the pledge of allegiance or national anthem.
Jimmy is just in sixth grade and at the beginning of each school day the pledge of allegiance is said. He does not want to participate but was told that if he fails to do so he will be expelled.
Does Jimmy have the right to choose whether or not to participate? No, patriotism takes precedence over personal beliefs. Yes, the government may not require individual expression. No, the government may require individual expression only when it is reaffirming the allegiance to the US.
0コメント