1976•bepress Legal RepositoryOpen access

Criminal Law—Escape—Defenses—Common Law Extension of Necessity—People v. Lovercamp, 43 Cal. App. 3d 823, 118 Cal. Rptr. 110 (1974).

Cameron Charles Page

Open full text 0 citations

Abstract

Criminal Law-Escape-Defenses-Common Law Extension of Criminal Law-Escape-Defenses-Common

Open-access reader

About this research paper

What this paper is about

Criminal Law-Escape-Defenses-Common Law Extension of Criminal Law-Escape-Defenses-Common

Why it matters

A significance statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.

Key contribution

A contribution statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.

Method / approach

Method details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Main findings

Findings are not separately available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Limitations

Limitations are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Applications

Application details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Available abstract

Criminal Law-Escape-Defenses-Common Law Extension of Criminal Law-Escape-Defenses-Common

Key concepts: Law, Extension (predicate logic), Political science, Criminal law, Computer science, Programming language

Back to paper search Browse research topics Original source

Criminal Law—Escape—Defenses—Common Law Extension of Necessity—People v. Lovercamp, 43 Cal. App. 3d 823, 118 Cal. Rptr. 110 (1974). — Research Paper | ScholarLens

Criminal Law—Escape—Defenses—Common Law Extension of Necessity—People v. Lovercamp, 43 Cal. App. 3d 823, 118 Cal. Rptr. 110 (1974).

About this research paper

What this paper is about

Why it matters

Key contribution

Method / approach

Main findings

Limitations

Applications

Available abstract

Related papers