Search for: "The People v. Cross"
Results 2061 - 2080
of 6,171
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
18 Nov 2010, 8:55 am
Faretta v. [read post]
14 Jan 2007, 10:20 pm
(See Diaz v. [read post]
12 Mar 2019, 6:49 am
” See People v. [read post]
27 Sep 2022, 6:00 am
The States that have sought to intervene in Ukraine v. [read post]
26 Feb 2017, 4:09 pm
On 25 February 2017, the Novia Scotia Court of Appeal dismissed the appeal against the award of damages in the case of Marson v Nova Scotia, 2017 NSCA 17 Denmark A Danish appeals court has upheld a defamation ruling and a 10,000-krone fine given to the Danish People’s Party, a populist party which supports the centre-right government. [read post]
18 Jan 2010, 7:32 am
(People v. [read post]
20 Apr 2014, 2:23 pm
It is settled that an accused's right to cross-examine witnesses and present a criminal defense is not absolute nor can the Sixth Amendment be read to "confer the right to present testimony free from the legitimate demands of the adversarial system as ruled in United States v Nobles and Michigan v Lucas. [read post]
15 Oct 2008, 12:24 am
Co. v. [read post]
22 Jun 2011, 7:32 am
Ward v. [read post]
28 Feb 2011, 5:25 am
People v. [read post]
19 May 2008, 8:55 am
Supreme Court, May 12, 2008 Gonzales v. [read post]
14 Jan 2016, 8:10 am
Prominent legal scholar Jed Purdy recently published a review of my book The Grasping Hand: Kelo v. [read post]
6 Sep 2022, 6:30 am
Unless a convention of the states assembled pursuant to Article V proceeds to ignore the language of Article V, the current structure of the Senate cannot be changed, and even permissible amendments will need the assent of 38 states. [read post]
30 Oct 2015, 10:24 am
It’s a cross-regulatory problem. [read post]
30 Mar 2011, 1:16 pm
Judicial Watch obtained the documents pursuant to a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) lawsuit filed on January 3, 2011 (Judicial Watch v. [read post]
22 Mar 2019, 1:48 pm
Here are some highlights from this week’s innocence-related media: A Racial Pattern So Obvious, Even the Supreme Court Might See ItFlowers v. [read post]
18 Sep 2018, 4:58 am
Are we ready to cross that bridge and pray it won’t fall down? [read post]
25 Jan 2022, 9:01 pm
But the Court’s religiosity also emerges in nominally non-religion controversies, including Dobbs v. [read post]
28 Apr 2020, 12:26 am
Cross-examination via video-link has previously been said to be unacceptable. [read post]
31 Mar 2020, 5:45 am
In 1868, the Court of Common Pleas heard the case of Chorlton v Lings where, as was feared by some MPs, it was argued that the Interpretation Act 1850 provided the term “man” in the Representation of the People Act 1867 “shall be deemed and taken to include females … unless the contrary is expressly provided” and meant that women who otherwise met the eligibility requirements could vote. [read post]
