Search for: "Rice v. Floyd" Results 1 - 17 of 17
Sort by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
5 Jan 2024, 5:37 pm by David M. Boertje
Imagine how little we would know about Rodney King, Eric Garner, Tamir Rice, Walter Scott, George Floyd, and many, many others had no one taken the time to record the horrendous incidents. [read post]
13 Dec 2023, 9:05 pm by renholding
Amidst growing public scrutiny and socio-economic shifts, particularly following the 2020 George Floyd social justice movement, the topic of board diversity is at the forefront of corporate governance debates. [read post]
18 Oct 2021, 1:37 am by INFORRM
The Application was refused, with Lord Summers relying on R v Legal Aid Board ex p. [read post]
28 Jun 2020, 8:14 pm by Steve Gottlieb
Press 2008); Charles Lane, The Day Freedom Died: The Colfax Massacre, the Supreme Court, and the Betrayal of Reconstruction (Henry Holt & Company 2008); and United States v. [read post]
23 Jun 2020, 11:12 am by Ashoka Mukpo
When Kishon McDonald saw the video of George Floyd’s murder at the hands of four officers from the Minneapolis Police Department, he could tell it was going to turn the country upside down. [read post]
2 Jul 2013, 1:41 pm
The other day, I was blogging about tags, and somebody asked what are all the tags. [read post]
22 Aug 2010, 9:20 pm by Steve Bainbridge
(77) Malcom Floyd: If V-Jax ends up on a 10 game hold out or being traded to Seattle, Floyd becomes Rivers # 1 WR. [read post]
13 Jun 2008, 3:40 am
You can separately subscribe to the IP Thinktank Global week in Review at the Subscribe page: [duncanbucknell.com] Highlights this week included: ECJ rules trade mark holders cannot stop honest comparative advertising: O2 Holdings Limited and O2 (UK) Limited v Hutchinson 3G UK Limited: (Out-Law), (Catch Us If You Can!!!) [read post]
4 Sep 2007, 2:47 am
Floyd, No. 06-1513 A sentence for offenses arising from a conspiracy to distribute crack cocaine and cocaine powder is vacated and remanded where the manner by which the district court reduced defendant's prior sentence of 48 months to a new sentence of 42 months was inconsistent with proper sentencing procedure, and it should have considered a departure from the calculated range of 41 to 51 months, not from the vacated 48-month sentence. [read post]