翻訳と辞書 Words near each other ・ R v Pearson; Ex parte Sipka ・ R v Penguin Books Ltd ・ R v Perka ・ R v Peverett ・ R v Plant ・ R v Powley ・ R v Prince ・ R v Pritchard ・ R v Prosper ・ R v Quick ・ R v Rahey ・ R v Reed ・ R v Registrar General, ex p Segerdal ・ R v Richards ・ R v Richardson ・ R v Rodgers ・ R v Ron Engineering and Construction (Eastern) Ltd ・ R v Ruzic ・ R v Ryan ・ R v S (RD) ・ R v Saibene ・ R v Sansregret ・ R v Saskatchewan Wheat Pool ・ R v Sault Ste-Marie (City of) ・ R v Savage ・ R v Schoombie ・ R v Schoonwinkel ・ R v Seaboyer ・ R v Secretary of State for Employment, ex p Seymour-Smith ・ R v Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs, ex p Bancoult (No 1) 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 Rodgers ： ウィキペディア英語版 R v Rodgers ''R v Rodgers'', 2006 SCC 15, () 1 S.C.R. 554, is a case decided by the Supreme Court of Canada on the constitutionality of the collection of blood samples from prisoners. The Court upheld the Criminal Code provision allowing for retroactive DNA samples of prisoners without notice. ==Background== Dennis Rodgers was a convicted sex offender who was serving his sentence in an Ontario prison. Since Rodgers was sentenced before the enactment of the 1998 ''DNA Identification Act'', his blood sample was not taken upon sentencing to be placed in the national database. Under the section 487.055(1)(c) of the Criminal Code, the Crown applied for an ex parte application for the DNA sample. Rodgers challenged the application on the basis that the enabling Code provision violated the rights within Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms. 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 Rodgers」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.