认真对待自愿性

Ian P. Farrell, J. Marceau
{"title":"认真对待自愿性","authors":"Ian P. Farrell, J. Marceau","doi":"10.2139/SSRN.2255141","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The near-unanimous belief among courts and commentators that the criminal law contains a voluntary act requirement obscures deep disagreement about the meaning, scope, and application of that requirement. This Article explores these longstanding and vexing theoretical disagreements, identifies practical problems that result from these uncertainties, and suggests a novel framework for substantially resolving the confusion. The resolution of these questions is no mere academic exercise. The difference in many cases, particularly strict liability prosecutions, will be the difference between guilt and innocence.","PeriodicalId":80721,"journal":{"name":"Boston College law review. Boston College. Law School","volume":"54 1","pages":"1545"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2013-04-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"3","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Taking Voluntariness Seriously\",\"authors\":\"Ian P. Farrell, J. Marceau\",\"doi\":\"10.2139/SSRN.2255141\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"The near-unanimous belief among courts and commentators that the criminal law contains a voluntary act requirement obscures deep disagreement about the meaning, scope, and application of that requirement. This Article explores these longstanding and vexing theoretical disagreements, identifies practical problems that result from these uncertainties, and suggests a novel framework for substantially resolving the confusion. The resolution of these questions is no mere academic exercise. The difference in many cases, particularly strict liability prosecutions, will be the difference between guilt and innocence.\",\"PeriodicalId\":80721,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Boston College law review. Boston College. Law School\",\"volume\":\"54 1\",\"pages\":\"1545\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2013-04-22\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"3\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Boston College law review. Boston College. Law School\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.2139/SSRN.2255141\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Boston College law review. Boston College. Law School","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2139/SSRN.2255141","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 3

摘要

法院和评论家几乎一致认为刑法包含自愿行为的要求,这掩盖了对这一要求的含义、范围和适用的深刻分歧。本文探讨了这些长期存在的、令人烦恼的理论分歧,确定了由这些不确定性导致的实际问题,并提出了一个新的框架来实质性地解决这些混乱。这些问题的解决不仅仅是学术上的练习。在许多情况下,特别是严格责任起诉的区别,将是有罪与无罪的区别。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Taking Voluntariness Seriously
The near-unanimous belief among courts and commentators that the criminal law contains a voluntary act requirement obscures deep disagreement about the meaning, scope, and application of that requirement. This Article explores these longstanding and vexing theoretical disagreements, identifies practical problems that result from these uncertainties, and suggests a novel framework for substantially resolving the confusion. The resolution of these questions is no mere academic exercise. The difference in many cases, particularly strict liability prosecutions, will be the difference between guilt and innocence.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
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:604180095
Book学术官方微信