Brainscape's Knowledge GenomeTM

Browse over 1 million classes created by top students, professors, publishers, and experts.


See full index

Criminal Law and Evidence > CASE NAMES > Flashcards

CASE NAMES Flashcards

1
Q

Baxter v HMA

A

Incitement mens rea - seriously intend to encourage the crime.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
2
Q

HMA v Kerr

2

A

Participation - watching does not count

Omissions - no general duty to interfere with a crime

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
3
Q

Bazter v HMA

A

Participation includes counsel and instigation

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
4
Q

R v Bainbridge

A

Participation includes provision of materials

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
5
Q

HMA v Igoe

A

Participation - assisting after the crime is not participation

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
6
Q

Coleman v HMA

A

Common purpose does not have to be explicit

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
7
Q

Shephard v HMA

A

Common purpose - accused is not liable for something unreasonably beyond common purpose

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
8
Q

HMA v Harris

A

Reckless injury actus reus - causing injury

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
9
Q

W v HMA

A

Reckless injury mens rea - recklessness/disregard

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
10
Q

Normand v HMA

A

Reckless endgangerment mens rea - recklessness/disregard

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
11
Q

Drury v HMA

2

A

Wicked recklessness test

Murder mens rea - wicked recklessness/intention

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
12
Q

HMA v Scott

A

life starts with breath and cry

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
13
Q

Bird v HMA

A

Unlawful culpable homicide - assualt with death

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
14
Q

Transco v HMA

A

Lawful culpable homicide definition - recklessly causing death

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
15
Q

Paton v HMA

A

Recklessness definition

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
16
Q

Black v Carmichael

2

A

Theft actus reus - appropriation without consent

Extortion actus reus

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
17
Q

Fowler v OBrien

A

Theft mens rea - intention to deprive

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
18
Q

HMA v Laing

2

A

Embezzlement definition

Alibi definition

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
19
Q

Cromar v HMA

A

Roberry actus reus - theft thorugh violence

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
20
Q
A
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
21
Q

Adcock v Archiabld

A

Fraud actus reus - deifnite result

22
Q

Mackenzie v Skeen

A

Fraud mens rea - intention, recklessness is not enough

23
Q

Latta v Herron

A

Reset mens rea - knowledge of illegal obtainment

24
Q

Wade v Robertson

A

Malicious mischief mens rea - recklessness

25
Q

HMA v Wilson

A

Malicious mischief - interfering with property, not just economic loss.

26
Q

Byrne v HMA

A

Fire-raising definition

27
Q

Smith v Donnelly

A

Breach of the Peace actus reus - cause alarm

28
Q

Montgomerie v Kilmarnock

A

Breach of the peace - objective test for alarm

29
Q

Lindsay v HMA

A

Breach of peace - must be alarm not just upset

30
Q

Jones v Carnegie

A

Breach of peace - conduct can be in private, must have risk of being seen

31
Q

Paterson v Airdrie

A

Abusive behaviour - objective test for threateningness

32
Q

Calrk v Syme

A

Ignorance of the law is not a defence

33
Q

HMA v Carson

A

Self-defence - can be third party

34
Q

Boyle v HMA

A

Self-defence not ruled out if accused started the fight

35
Q

HMA v Docherty

2

A

self-defence requirements

coercion - threat does not have to be personal

36
Q

McBrearty v HMA

A

self-defence - escape must not put you at risk

37
Q

McCluskey v HMA

A

Self-defence - lethal force if rape/death

38
Q

Capolo v HMA

A

Provocation - requirements

39
Q

Gillon v HMA

A

Provocation - violence must be proportionate

40
Q

McKay v HMA

2

A

Provocation - cumulative does not count

Couple need to have a realtionship of fidelity

41
Q

Hill v HMA

A

provocation - do not need to catch them in the act

42
Q

Moss v Howdle

A

Necessity requirements

43
Q

Thomson v HMA

A

Coercion requirements

44
Q

Trotter v HMA

A

Coercion - threat must be carried out immediately

45
Q

Brennan v HMA

A

Voluntariy intoxication is not a defence

46
Q

Ross v HMA

A

Automatism requirements

47
Q

Atkinson v HMA

A

Assault can be just producing fear

48
Q

Connor v Jessup

A

Assault - intention can be transfered

49
Q

Smart v HMA

A

Assault - consent is not a defence

50
Q

Bone v HMA

A

Omissions liability - parents should interfere with child crime.

51
Q

Maxwell v HMA

A

Conspiracy actus reus

Criminal Law and Evidence (5 decks)

Brainscape helps you reach your goals faster, through stronger study habits.
© 2025 Bold Learning Solutions. Terms and Conditions