Supreme Court upholds criminal prohibitions on possession of marijuana for recreational use.

Gord Cruess
{"title":"Supreme Court upholds criminal prohibitions on possession of marijuana for recreational use.","authors":"Gord Cruess","doi":"","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>In two recent decisions, R v Malmo-Levine and R v Caine (decided together) and R v Clay, the Supreme Court of Canada ruled that the criminal prohibition on marijuana possession, in the absence of a regulatory exemption for medical purposes, is constitutional.</p>","PeriodicalId":83647,"journal":{"name":"Canadian HIV/AIDS policy & law review","volume":"9 1","pages":"54-5"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2004-04-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Canadian HIV/AIDS policy & law review","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

In two recent decisions, R v Malmo-Levine and R v Caine (decided together) and R v Clay, the Supreme Court of Canada ruled that the criminal prohibition on marijuana possession, in the absence of a regulatory exemption for medical purposes, is constitutional.

最高法院支持对娱乐性大麻持有的刑事禁令。
在最近的两项判决中,R诉马尔默-莱文案和R诉凯恩案(一起判决)以及R诉克莱案,加拿大最高法院裁定,在没有医疗目的的监管豁免的情况下,对持有大麻的刑事禁令是符合宪法的。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信