翻訳と辞書 Words near each other ・ R v Edwards Books and Art Ltd ・ R v Evans ・ R v Ewanchuk ・ R v Faulkner ・ R v Fearon ・ R v Feeney ・ R v Finta ・ R v Forlee ・ R v G ・ R v George ・ R v Ghosh ・ R v Glad Day Bookshops Inc ・ R v Gladstone ・ R v Gladue ・ R v Gnango ・ R v Godoy ・ R v Goltz ・ R v Gonzales ・ R v Grant ・ R v Grantham ・ R v Grillo ・ R v Gruenke ・ R v Guerin ・ R v Généreux ・ R v Hall ・ R v Hancock ・ R v Handy ・ R v Hape ・ R v Harbottle ・ R v Harrison 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 Godoy ： ウィキペディア英語版 R v Godoy ''R v Godoy'', () 1 S.C.R. 311 is a leading Supreme Court of Canada decision regarding the scope of police powers to enter into private dwellings without a warrant in order to protect lives. The Court affirmed that police have a common law duty to protect lives and that an anonymous 911 call is sufficient to invoke that duty, consequently, the police were justified in forcibly entering into the private home. ==Background== On June 1, 1992, a 911 operator received an "unknown trouble" call where the phone was disconnected before the operator heard any voice. The call was traced to Vincent Godoy's house and four police officers were dispatched to his house. The policy of the police is to treat "unknown trouble" calls as high priority. The officers talked with Godoy who told them that there was no problem. One officer asked if they could come inside. Godoy tried to close the door but the officer put his foot in the door and they all entered. The officers found a battered woman sobbing. They arrested Godoy for assault. In the Ontario Court of Appeal, the court found that the police acted validly based on their common law duty to prevent serious injury and protect lives. The Supreme Court upheld the Court of Appeal's decision. 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 Godoy」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.