This site uses cookies to improve your experience. To help us insure we adhere to various privacy regulations, please select your country/region of residence. If you do not select a country, we will assume you are from the United States. Select your Cookie Settings or view our Privacy Policy and Terms of Use.
Cookie Settings
Cookies and similar technologies are used on this website for proper function of the website, for tracking performance analytics and for marketing purposes. We and some of our third-party providers may use cookie data for various purposes. Please review the cookie settings below and choose your preference.
Used for the proper function of the website
Used for monitoring website traffic and interactions
Cookie Settings
Cookies and similar technologies are used on this website for proper function of the website, for tracking performance analytics and for marketing purposes. We and some of our third-party providers may use cookie data for various purposes. Please review the cookie settings below and choose your preference.
Strictly Necessary: Used for the proper function of the website
Performance/Analytics: Used for monitoring website traffic and interactions
The Supreme Court reversed that judgment and remanded the case. Justice Elena Kagan, joined by Justices Stephen Breyer, Sonia Sotomayor and Neil Gorsuch, wrote the opinion of the court, concluding that any offense with a mensrea or mental state of recklessness does not qualify as a violent felony under the ACCA.
The opinion is a victory for physicians prescribing innovative treatments that they believe serve legitimate medical purposes, and it should assuage concerns about a ruling that could have chilled more doctors from prescribing needed pain treatments. The case, Ruan v. Referencing a “a longstanding presumption, traceable.
Even then, it can be difficult since attempted murder requires proof that the defendant “must have taken a substantial step towards that crime, and must also have had the requisite mensrea.” Indeed, such a claim would contradict controlling Supreme Court precedent. ” Braxton v. United States , 500 U.S.
That is a far cry from evidence showing mensrea — “guilty mind.” Building a criminal case on the failure to act to stop the violence is a notoriously difficult case to make. That speech appears protected by the First Amendment and existing Supreme Court precedent. At 4:17 p.m., In Brandenburg v.
We organize all of the trending information in your field so you don't have to. Join 99,000+ users and stay up to date on the latest articles your peers are reading.
You know about us, now we want to get to know you!
Let's personalize your content
Let's get even more personalized
We recognize your account from another site in our network, please click 'Send Email' below to continue with verifying your account and setting a password.
Let's personalize your content