Search for: "In Re: Standard Jury Instructions In Criminal Cases (2006-3)" Results 1 - 20 of 69
Sort by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
22 Feb 2024, 7:28 am by Alex Phipps
These summaries will be added to Smith’s Criminal Case Compendium, a free and searchable database of case summaries from 2008 to the present. [read post]
22 Sep 2022, 8:12 am by Alex Phipps
This summary will be added to Smith’s Criminal Case Compendium, a free and searchable database of case summaries from 2008 to the present. [read post]
4 Aug 2020, 6:19 am by Kayla Campbell
See Sixth Circuit Pattern Criminal Jury Instructions 1.03(5). [read post]
11 May 2020, 1:09 am by Schachtman
This judicial response was, of course, the standard one before the 1993 Daubert decision, but Justice Blackmun’s opinion kept it alive in frequently quote dicta: “Vigorous cross-examination, presentation of contrary evidence, and careful instruction on the burden of proof are the traditional and appropriate means of attacking shaky but admissible evidence. [read post]
21 Jan 2020, 7:21 am by MBettman
Craig, 2006-Ohio-4571 (2006) (Allowing evidence of prior bad acts that had been previously rejected by a grand jury to be admitted in a subsequent criminal prosecution.) [read post]
19 Aug 2019, 9:00 pm by Jamie Markham
After two status hearings, the State entered a dismissal on form AOC-CR-307, checking the “dismissal” box and writing “hung jury, state has elected not to re-try case” on the form. [read post]
1 Feb 2019, 6:29 am by Jacques Singer-Emery
Paradis further noted that in Lijeberg the Supreme Court even vacated the findings of a jury after a significant criminal trial already occurred. [read post]
30 May 2018, 2:03 pm
If we hold, as the court apparently does, that one implication of the existence of such precise, independent standards is that juries must be instructed to find facts according to those standards, we raise the spectre of requiring trial judges in defamation cases to instruct juries as to four separate and distinct burdens of proof, falling variously on the plaintiff and defendant. [read post]
30 May 2018, 1:31 pm by Christine Corcos
If we hold, as the court apparently does, that one implication of the existence of such precise, independent standards is that juries must be instructed to find facts according to those standards, we raise the spectre of requiring trial judges in defamation cases to instruct juries as to four separate and distinct burdens of proof, falling variously on the plaintiff and defendant. [read post]
6 Feb 2018, 7:16 am by Marcia Shein
Georgia Criminal Law News December 2017 PRE &POST CONVICTION LAW PUBLICATION JURY NOTE
 Dowda v. [read post]
3 Oct 2017, 8:28 am by Harry Graver
As a brief refresher, the procedural highlights are as follows: February 2008: Bahlul is re-charged under the 2006 Military Commissions Act (“2006 MCA”) with conspiracy to commit war crimes, solicitation of others to commit war crimes, and providing material support for terrorism. [read post]
14 Sep 2017, 1:33 pm by Wolfgang Demino
Each written credit service agreement contained a provision entitled "Waiver of Jury Trial and Arbitration Provision" (hereinafter referred to as "arbitration provision"). [read post]
1 Jun 2017, 8:15 am by Steven Boutwell
The jury in the Robertson case was instructed to use the Kennedy “significant nexus” test in determining that the tributary Robertson polluted was in fact regulated by the CWA. [read post]
9 Aug 2016, 10:44 am by Chris Castle
We can infer that person did so probably with the blessing if not the instruction of the White House. [read post]