actus reus


Also found in: Dictionary, Thesaurus, Legal, Wikipedia.

actus reus (ak·ˑts rē·s),

n a physical, criminal act that must be undoubtedly established as having occurred in order to convict a defendant of a crime.
References in periodicals archive ?
39) The Supreme Court was thus forced to determine whether the mens rea of the supervisors could be combined with the actus reus of the vice president for the purposes of determining the hospital's USERRA liability.
When we avoid the error of assuming that actus reus and mens rea
Nevertheless, given the defendant's strictly verbal conduct, as well as the fact that impingement on quasi-legitimate freedom of expression may be implicated, isolated or sporadic hate speech, as well as hate speech uttered as part of low-level or geographically removed chapeau violence, may not qualify as the actus reus of hate speech as a CAH.
There is always some disconnect between the actus reus and mens rea in these cases, since the intended act is unsuccessful.
73) Defense counsel maintained that the IMT had made a definitive pronouncement against conspiracy to commit war crimes and argued that conspiracy amounted to "essentially a thought crime," noting that it only required an otherwise insubstantial act in furtherance of a common purpose rather than an actus reus and mens rea tied to a specific crime.
43) For genocidal guilt to attach, the accused must perform the actus reus of genocide with the intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnical, (44) racial, or religious group because it is a national, ethnical, racial, or religious group.
First, conviction for conspiracy does require some overt act, an actus reus, involving the beginning stages of the planned illegal act, specifically, an agreement to commit the crime.
I say this because, for Moore, the creation of the condition of peril is the basic act that is partially identical to the complex action that satisfies the actus reus of a crime.
naturally requires inquiry into mens rea and actus reus.
Having considered the range and qualities of the relevant speech, it is now appropriate to examine the issue left unresolved by the Media Case appeals judgment: whether hate speech not explicitly calling for violence may constitute the actus reus for CAH-persecution.
The formal structure is based on the familiar distinctions between offenses and defenses and between mens rea and actus reus.
Duff's actus reus test for attempt is that the agent must be "in the process of committing" or be "embarked on" the substantive offense.