翻訳と辞書 Words near each other ・ R v Mkize ・ R v Mohan ・ R v Morales ・ R v Morgentaler ・ R v Morgentaler (1993) ・ R v Morris; Anderton v Burnside ・ R v Morrisey ・ R v Motomane ・ R v Mubila ・ R v Nedrick ・ R v Negus ・ R v Neil ・ R v Nette ・ R v Noble ・ R v Nova Scotia Pharmaceutical Society ・ R v Nur ・ R v O'Connor ・ R v O'Grady ・ R v Oakes ・ R v Oickle ・ R v Owen ・ R v Pamajewon ・ R v Pan; R v Sawyer ・ R v Panel on Take-overs and Mergers, ex p Datafin plc ・ R v Park ・ R v Parks ・ R v Patel ・ R v Patrick ・ R v Peacock ・ R v Pearson; Ex parte Sipka 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 Nur ： ウィキペディア英語版 R v Nur is a Canadian constitutional law case, concerning the constitutionality of mandatory minimum sentences for firearm offences. == Background == In 2008, the Conservative government introduced the ''Tackling Violent Crime Act'', a bill that amended the ''Criminal Code of Canada'' by adding mandatory minimum sentences for those found guilty of various firearm offences.〔 The bill received royal assent and mandatory minimum sentences were attached to section 95(1) of the ''Criminal Code'', a hybrid offence which prohibited possession of a loaded prohibited firearm, or possession of an unloaded prohibited firearm alongside ammunition. If the Crown elected to proceed by summary conviction, the mandatory minimum sentence was one year under section 95(2)(b) of the ''Criminal Code''. Indictable offences were punishable by a mandatory minimum sentence of three years under section 95(2)(a)(i) of the ''Criminal Code''.〔SCC, par. 20〕 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 Nur」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.