Search for: "People v. Rivera"
Results 181 - 200
of 233
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
22 Jan 2022, 8:46 am
Rivera-Martinez, 2021 VT 96. [read post]
26 Apr 2024, 3:35 am
Nor may the prosecution use “prior convictions or proof of the prior commission of specific, criminal, vicious or immoral acts” other than to impeach the accused’s credibility (People v Sandoval, 34 NY2d 371 , 374 [ 1974]). [read post]
12 Oct 2012, 3:00 am
Try to sort through Tolmosova v Umarova 2012 NY Slip Op 51921(U) Decided on October 1, 2012 Supreme Court, Kings County Schmidt, J. and you will see two things. [read post]
5 Feb 2009, 12:19 pm
Rivera v. [read post]
30 Jul 2021, 8:52 am
Rivera Law Office The graphic in this logo is a soldier in an attack position. [read post]
29 Jan 2019, 9:08 am
United States, 17-6357, Rivera v. [read post]
3 May 2022, 1:07 pm
Mead PS, Slutsker L, Dietz V, McCaig LF, Bresee JS, Shapiro C, et al. [read post]
16 Jul 2016, 10:39 am
Approximately 2,000 people are hospitalized, and 60 people die as a direct result of E. coli O157:H7 infections and complications. [read post]
3 Feb 2021, 5:31 am
[Sophia M.], 179 A.D.3d at 802, quoting People v. [read post]
6 Sep 2007, 10:16 pm
V. [read post]
28 Jun 2007, 10:16 am
Your marketing people talk to the docs. [read post]
10 Aug 2011, 7:35 am
A fifth indictment, United States v. [read post]
10 Aug 2011, 7:35 am
A fifth indictment, United States v. [read post]
10 Aug 2011, 7:35 am
A fifth indictment, United States v. [read post]
10 Aug 2011, 7:35 am
A fifth indictment, United States v. [read post]
22 Dec 2006, 2:16 pm
JUNE • Miranda v. [read post]
24 Sep 2022, 8:03 am
., LLC v. [read post]
2 Jun 2011, 12:46 pm
Nail v. [read post]
5 Jan 2016, 8:32 pm
Since LISPCC is not a police agency, it cannot represent to the public that it is a police or state agency (Abrams v. [read post]
29 Jan 2025, 6:00 am
Corp., 2024 NY Slip Op 05867, in which New York State's Court of Appeals had held that New Jersey Transit was not an arm of the State of New Jersey, Judge Rivera dissenting in an opinion, the Appellate Division opined New Jersey Transit was not entitled to invoke the doctrine of sovereign immunity in the Alvaran litigation. [read post]
