Canadian law enforcement can only arrest someone if there is an active arrest warrant or a reasonable suspicion that the person has committed, is committing, or is about to commit a crime. The arresting officers must identify themselves as law enforcement officers and state that they are putting the person under arrest. They must also tell people the charges against them and let them talk to a lawyer. Police can't question someone until they have a chance to talk to a lawyer, but they can search the person for evidence.
The Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms used Aristotle's theory of natural rights as an inspiration. Natural rights are universally agreed upon by all mankind, and it is the duty of government to enforce these rights for the individual.
"You do not have to say anything, but it may harm your defence if you do not mention when questioned something which you later rely on in court. Anything you do say may be given in evidence."Slightly different version in the US- known as the Miranda Rights or Miranda warning- and it DOES vary slightly from state to state:"You have the right to remain silent. Anything you say can and will be used against you in a court of law. You have the right to speak to an attorney. If you cannot afford an attorney, one will be appointed for you. Do you understand these rights as they have been read to you?"Added: In the US, it is uncommon for officers to read Miranda immediately upon arrest. Miranda warnings protect defendants from interrogation. Therefore, Miranda is most commonly read after the arrest, before an interrogation.
The US Supreme Court ruling in the case of Miranda v. Arizona established this right.However, there is no requirement that you be advised by the arresting officer, immediately upon your arrest, only that you be read your rights before actual interrogation about the particular offense commences. .If there is any question about the admissibility of the evidence against you, your defense attorney will raise it at the appropraite time.
You're referring to the case of Miranda v. ArizonaHowever, there is no requirement that the information be given upon arrest.
Physical efforts to oppose a lawful arrest; the resistance is classified as assault and battery upon the person of the police officer attempting to make the arrest.
It is possible, the majority of arrest are public record. Depending upon the laws of the state and municipality/area and the reason for the arrest it can become a permanent part of a person's public history.
Yes...BUT - this "yes" is DEPENDENT upon the SPECIFIC circumstances of the particular case.
No. Mother's life estate is extinguished upon her death. Her husband would have no rights in the property whatsoever.No. Mother's life estate is extinguished upon her death. Her husband would have no rights in the property whatsoever.No. Mother's life estate is extinguished upon her death. Her husband would have no rights in the property whatsoever.No. Mother's life estate is extinguished upon her death. Her husband would have no rights in the property whatsoever.
Enforcement of intellectual property rights is the responsibility of the owner of those rights, unless the violation is also a criminal offense, in which case the relevant law enforcement agencies would have jurisdiction upon the complaint by the owners. For example, US Customs can seize goods with counterfeit trademarks, the FBI can arrest copyright pirates.
yes they do check you. Typically, as part of the arrest process, there is a search. However, depending upon the circumstances, the search may take place before the arrest, or you may be under arrest and the search can take place after.
Answer for the USA: The writers of the constitution believed that rights of the individual were a "natural right", which mean that the right did not come from the state or government. Thus, if you read the bill of rights, it states that no law shall be passed to violate these rights, instead of granting these rights. This is a very important concept that was and still is unusual in the world. Thus, social justice would be based on maintaining the rights of the individual, which are the individual's natural rights.
quality-of-life crimes