Warning

Info

Table of Contents
Chris22, HLS '22 |

0 0

Back to briefs

People v. Lauria

(1967)

Court of Appeal of the State of California - 251 Cal. App. 2d 471

tl;dr:

A supplier may be held criminally liable for the criminal use of his services if there is evidence of an intent to further the criminal acts.

Video Summary

ICRAIssue, Conclusion, Rule, Analysis for People v. Lauria

LSD+ exclusive

This content is exclusively for LSD+ users.

Sign up for LSD+ for full access to the People v. Lauria case brief summary.

Enjoy unlimited access with our 14-day free trial.

Facts & HoldingPeople v. Lauria case brief facts & holding

Facts:Lauria owned a phone services that was used by professionals...

Holding:The court found that Lauria could not be held criminally...

LSD+ exclusive

This content is exclusively for LSD+ users.

Sign up for LSD+ for full access to the People v. Lauria case brief summary.

Enjoy unlimited access with our 14-day free trial.

DeepDiveHighlight a legal term to see the definition

Font size -+
People v. Lauria | Case Brief DeepDive
Majority opinion, author: FLEMING, J.
Level 1
Click below 👇 to DeepDive

The court is tasked with determining whether a supplier of goods or services who knows they are being used to assist an illegal business becomes part of a conspiracy to further that illegal enterprise. The court must also consider whether knowledge alone is sufficient to infer criminal intent or if intent can only be inferred when the supplier of legal goods for illegal use has a stake in the venture or when no legitimate use for the goods or services exists. The court provides examples of cases where the intent to further illegal activity was established through direct evidence or an inference based on the supplier's special interest in the activity or the aggravated nature of the crime. In this case, the court found insufficient evidence to prove the defendant's participation in a criminal conspiracy to further prostitution. The court suggests that public authorities can combat prostitution through civil remedies such as licensing telephone answering services and revoking licenses for tolerating prostitution. Additionally, providing telephone answering services in aid of prostitution could be made a crime.

🤯 High points 🤯Key points contributed by students on LSD

LSD+ exclusive

This content is exclusively for LSD+ users.

Sign up for LSD+ for full access to the People v. Lauria case brief summary.

Enjoy unlimited access with our 14-day free trial.

LSD+ Case Briefs

Features

  • DeepDive for detailed case analysis
  • Over 50,000 existing case briefs
  • Instant briefs for another 6,000,000 cases
  • Highlight dictionary for legal term definitions
  • Social learning with chat and high points

Over 50,000 Cases Briefed

LSD+ gives you access to over 50,000 case briefs, more than anyone else. Be the first to email us the website of a case brief product that offers you more case briefs and we'll give you a free year of LSD+.

14-Day Free Trial

Unlimited access. Read as much content as you want during your trial with no device limitations. Cancel any time during your trial and keep access for the full 14 days.

Integrated Legal Dictionary

Lawyers and judges love to use big words. And Latin, for some reason.

Highlight a legal term in LSD Briefs and get an instant, plain English definition. Try highlighting contract or specific performance. No need to search or read through a list of definitions, simply highlight the words you don’t know and our LSDefine integration will instantly give you a definition to any of over 30,000 legal terms.

DeepDive

DeepDive allows you to explore legal cases like never before. DeepDive offers multiple levels of case summaries, which empowers you to quickly and easily find the information you need to stay on top of readings. Easily navigate through summary levels and click on any text to get more detail, all the way down to the original legal case text.

Brief anything. Instantly.

Our proprietary state-of-the-art system can instantly brief over 6,000,000 US cases. That means we can probably brief that case that your professor assigned last night when she sent you a poorly scanned pdf and told you to read every third paragraph. Or maybe she uploaded it to Canvas and didn’t really tell you to read it, but you know you probably should. Tenure does wild things to good people.

Social Learning with Chat and High Points

Study groups are a great way to learn and explore a case. LSD has chat rooms for each case to let you ask questions across the community and hear what other students struggled with and how they put it all together. Learn the key points of every case from other LSD+ users and share your knowledge with LSD High Points.

Real-Time Brief Feedback

Don’t settle for mistakes in briefs that have been there for 10 years and never fixed. Find an issue or something missing from a brief? Down vote and we will make improvements. All of our case brief editors graduated from from T14 law schools.

People v. Lauria

Chat for People v. Lauria
brief-736
👍 Chat vibe: 0 👎
Help us make LSD better!
Tell us what's important to you
LSD+ is ad-free, with DMs, discounts, case briefs & more.