翻訳と辞書 Words near each other ・ R v Burgess ・ R v Burgess; Ex parte Henry ・ R v Burlingham ・ R v Butler ・ R v Béland ・ R v Canadian Dredge & Dock Co ・ R v Carroll ・ R v Carto ・ R v Chaulk ・ R v Chaytor ・ R v Cheshire ・ R v Church of Scientology of Toronto ・ R v Cinous ・ R v Clarke ・ R v Clarkson ・ R v Clay ・ R v Cogdon ・ R v Collins ・ R v Collins (1987) ・ R v Coney ・ R v Constanza ・ R v Cook ・ R v Coote ・ R v Coulson, Brooks and others ・ R v Creighton ・ R v Crown Zellerbach Canada Ltd ・ R v Cuerrier ・ R v Cunningham ・ R v Darrach ・ R v Daviault Dictionary Lists mini英和辞書 mini和英辞書 Webster 1913 Latin-English FOLDOC Wikipedia English ウィキペディア

翻訳と辞書　辞書検索 [ 開発暫定版 ] スポンサード リンク R v Clay ： ウィキペディア英語版 R v Clay ''R v Clay'' () 3 S.C.R. 735, is a decision by the Supreme Court of Canada on the constitutionality of the prohibition to possess marijuana. The accused claimed that his section 7 Charter rights were violated. The Court dismissed the claim. This case is the final of a trilogy of cases regarding the constitutionality of the prohibition of marijuana. ==Background== Clay was a 26-year-old owner of "The Great Canadian Hemporium" in London, Ontario where he held many hemp related products. He was caught selling marijuana plant cuttings to an undercover police officer and was charged under the former Narcotics Control Act. Clay argued that his Charter rights were violated by the Narcotics Control Act's prohibition of possession of marijuana. At trial and appeal the claim was dismissed. 抄文引用元・出典: フリー百科事典『 ウィキペディア（Wikipedia）』 ■ウィキペディアで「R v Clay」の詳細全文を読む スポンサード リンク 翻訳と辞書 : 翻訳のためのインターネットリソース Copyright(C) kotoba.ne.jp 1997-2016. All Rights Reserved.