Chance v. Pac-Tel Teletrac Inc.

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• discussing Keats v. State, 64 P.3d 104, 107 (Wyo. 2003) (holding that arson is a specific-intent crime because it requires a malicious burning with intent to destroy or damage an occupied structure), and Holbrook v. State, 772 A.2d 1240, 1248 (Md. 2001
• \Few areas of criminal law pose more difficulty than the proper definition of the mens rea required for any particular crime\ [citation omitted]
• specific intent crimes require proof that defendant not only consciously intended to take certain actions, but also consciously intended certain consequences
• jury instruction on specific intent was error, but it skewed in favor of defendant

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).