Search for: "United States v. Sheehan Grant"
Results 1 - 20
of 29
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
19 Sep 2023, 8:09 am
Smyth v. [read post]
7 Jul 2023, 1:03 pm
United States Secret Service, USSS Timeline of Jan. 6, 2021 (FOIA release on Jun. 29, 2021) 9. [read post]
13 Sep 2022, 6:30 am
I had not previously met Jeanne Sheehan Zaino or Wilfred Codrington (though I did happily blurb the book on constitutional amendment that Wilfred co-authored with John Kowal). [read post]
30 Oct 2021, 12:07 pm
Jackson and United States v. [read post]
15 May 2020, 10:11 am
Credit: Reuters In the United States, police violence frequently dominates the news cycle. [read post]
8 Jul 2019, 10:00 am
Supreme Court in United States v. [read post]
23 May 2019, 7:12 am
United States, United States v. [read post]
18 Apr 2019, 2:42 pm
Sheehan, but dismissed it as improvidently granted. [read post]
27 Mar 2017, 4:18 am
Commentary comes from Eleanor Sheehan at popsugar. [read post]
26 Feb 2017, 9:30 pm
In a recent case, San Francisco v. [read post]
19 May 2015, 6:45 am
The Court granted one new case: Campbell-Ewald Co. v. [read post]
18 May 2015, 7:32 am
United States, No. 13-1487: When the defendant has been convicted of a felony and can no longer legally possess firearms, and his guns have been seized by the government, "a court may approve the transfer of a felon's guns consistently with §922(g) if, but only if, the recipient will not grant the felon control over those weapons. [read post]
31 Mar 2015, 3:06 am
Other commentary on yesterday’s grants comes from Kent Scheidegger at Crime and Consequences. [read post]
12 Jan 2015, 3:24 am
In an op-ed for the Los Angeles Times, Amanda Hollis-Brusky argues that, although the Court’s decision in Citizens United v. [read post]
8 Dec 2014, 3:41 am
On Friday the Court issued the first set of orders from its December 5 Conference, granting cert. in three cases: Walker v. [read post]
4 Dec 2014, 11:05 am
Also granted was first-time relist City and County of San Francisco v. [read post]
3 Dec 2014, 4:57 am
United States, the Facebook threats case, continues. [read post]
20 Nov 2014, 5:00 am
§ 2254(d)(2) merely because the allegedly biased judge rules on the claim based on facts within her knowledge without first conducting an evidentiary hearing, or whether a federal court must grant AEDPA deference to the judge's determination when the evidence in the state-court record supports it. [read post]
11 Nov 2014, 9:15 am
§ 2254(d)(2) merely because the allegedly biased judge rules on the claim based on facts within her knowledge without first conducting an evidentiary hearing, or whether a federal court must grant AEDPA deference to the judge's determination when the evidence in the state-court record supports it. [read post]
