Search for: "Keys v. State" Results 2121 - 2140 of 20,694
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
21 Jan 2009, 9:44 am
Sarausad- 6-3, that the Ninth Circuit erred in granting federal habeas relief after a State Supreme Court decision. [read post]
2 Jun 2015, 8:16 pm by Robert Dietrick
Harkening to doubts expressed by Judge Sutton in his United States v. [read post]
19 Mar 2018, 6:46 am by ASAD KHAN
Despite the key finding that the grant of bail presupposes lawful detention, Lord Lloyd-Jones subjected his judgment to the caveat that this rule is not necessarily a principle of universal application and is restricted to the interpretation of the provisions of Sch 2 of the 1971 Act. [read post]
30 Jan 2013, 11:37 am by Stone Law, P.C.
While this may seem like it is the exact same facts as Kirtsaeng, there was a key difference. [read post]
19 Apr 2023, 1:42 pm by NARF
Buzzard (Major Crimes Act; Discovery; Cherokee Nation) United States v. [read post]
19 Aug 2009, 8:10 pm
The Supreme Court of Hawaii will hear oral arguments on Thursday, August 20, 2009, from 9:00-10:00 in Dupree v. [read post]
26 Jun 2009, 3:55 am
--Court: United States District Court for the Eastern District of WisconsinOpinion Date: 6/9/09Cite: The Clorox Co. v. [read post]
13 Jun 2024, 11:36 am by Reference Staff
California, but without a citation (573 U.S. 373 (2014)), and the key Washington State Supreme Court case, State v. [read post]
12 Jul 2012, 11:56 am by Vikram Raghavan
This catch-all phrase did not hold the field for long though and less than a decade later, eleven judges in of that Court in State of Bombay v. [read post]
16 Dec 2021, 12:26 pm by Kevin Kaufman
If we accept the state’s argument that it’s an excise tax, then it’s probably an unconstitutional one, because it fails to meet the nexus requirements established in cases like Complete Auto Transit v. [read post]
8 Feb 2016, 6:32 am by David Ryan
He eventually came to the United States and currently lives in Alexandria, Virginia. [read post]
2 Jul 2014, 5:05 am
The Commonwealth further stated that its protocol would not violate [Gelfgatt’s] rights under . . . the 5h Amendment to the United States Constitution. . . . [read post]