R v Penton

Steve Coughlan

R v Penton

Research output: Contribution to journal › Article › peer-review

Abstract

There is room to question the conclusion in this case that the accused could not be convicted of attempting to cause a disturbance. The basis for that conclusion is that the accused could not reasonably have foreseen the result, but it is not clear that that reasoning should suceed.

Original language	Canadian English
Journal	Articles, Book Chapters, & Popular Press
Publication status	Published - Jan. 1 2020

Keywords

Criminal Law
Canada
Sexual Offences
Public Morals
Disorderly Conduct
Causing Disturbance

Disciplines

Criminal Law
Criminal Procedure
Law

UN SDGs

This output contributes to the following UN Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs)

Access to Document

https://dal.novanet.ca/permalink/01NOVA_DAL/1nek75v/alma990014190870107190

Cite this

@article{d9c3e021ec034de18e26b2139fbc2fc6,

title = "R v Penton",

abstract = " There is room to question the conclusion in this case that the accused could not be convicted of attempting to cause a disturbance. The basis for that conclusion is that the accused could not reasonably have foreseen the result, but it is not clear that that reasoning should suceed.",

keywords = "Criminal Law, Canada, Sexual Offences, Public Morals, Disorderly Conduct, Causing Disturbance",

author = "Steve Coughlan",

note = "Stephen Coughlan, {"}R v Penton{"}, Case Comment, (2020) 64 CR (7th) 411.",

year = "2020",

month = jan,

day = "1",

language = "Canadian English",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - R v Penton

AU - Coughlan, Steve

N1 - Stephen Coughlan, "R v Penton", Case Comment, (2020) 64 CR (7th) 411.

PY - 2020/1/1

Y1 - 2020/1/1

N2 - There is room to question the conclusion in this case that the accused could not be convicted of attempting to cause a disturbance. The basis for that conclusion is that the accused could not reasonably have foreseen the result, but it is not clear that that reasoning should suceed.

AB - There is room to question the conclusion in this case that the accused could not be convicted of attempting to cause a disturbance. The basis for that conclusion is that the accused could not reasonably have foreseen the result, but it is not clear that that reasoning should suceed.

KW - Criminal Law

KW - Canada

KW - Sexual Offences

KW - Public Morals

KW - Disorderly Conduct

KW - Causing Disturbance

UR - https://digitalcommons.schulichlaw.dal.ca/scholarly_works/1284

UR - https://dal.novanet.ca/permalink/01NOVA_DAL/1nek75v/alma990014190870107190

M3 - Article

JO - Articles, Book Chapters, & Popular Press

JF - Articles, Book Chapters, & Popular Press

ER -

R v Penton

Abstract

Keywords

Disciplines

UN SDGs

Access to Document

Other files and links

Fingerprint

Cite this