Search for: "Case v. People" Results 2301 - 2320 of 51,984
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
23 Nov 2011, 11:56 am by Record on Appeal
As a reminder, the criminal case arose from the March 14, 2006 breach of the Ka Loko Reservoir that caused the deaths of seven people. [read post]
1 Oct 2018, 7:40 pm by Brian Shiffrin
” If a juror’s statements during voir dire raise a doubt about his impartiality, such as statements that he has a pre-formed opinion about the case, that juror cannot be permitted to sit unless he states unequivocally that he can be fair and decide the case solely on the evidence adduced at trial (People v Johnson, 17 NY3d 752, 753 [2011]; People v Chambers, 97 NY2d 417, 419 [2002]; People v Arnold, 96 NY2d 358,… [read post]
29 Jun 2021, 3:58 pm by Howard Wasserman
This case is analogous to a Tenth Circuit decision from January finding no state action in blocking people from an account started during an initial campaign and... [read post]
6 Jan 2015, 4:16 pm
 But here's a case where taking the law somewhat into one's own hands and blocking a drunk driver from continuing on his course of conduct seems commendable.What about the drunk driver of the tractor-trailer, you might ask? [read post]
23 Jul 2018, 11:58 pm
  Are we really THAT hard core about procedure in a case like this? [read post]
12 Mar 2020, 3:51 pm
  There's some evidence for sure, and the only issue is whether it's enough to vitiate the need for a warrant.So, for me, a much closer case than it is for the Court of Appeal. [read post]
29 Jul 2014, 2:35 pm
 Not a pretty one.But I mention this case for a different reason as well.Picture in your mind the defendant, Leonard. [read post]
27 Mar 2014, 1:04 pm
 Though I'm not sure why that's not in fact precisely the case here. [read post]
30 Aug 2022, 8:06 am
 With a criminal case, you're being charged with a particular offense, and you can't be charged with that offense again. [read post]
31 Aug 2007, 12:40 pm
This case starts with a chase of the poor people that drag our country down. [read post]
27 Jul 2016, 5:37 am by INFORRM
In the case of CICAD v Switzerland (Judgment of 7 June 2016)(French only), the Third Section of the Court of Human Rights held that a judgment finding that an accusation of anti-semitism made by the applicant was unlawful did not violate Article 10. [read post]