Search for: "FRYE v. STATE"
Results 221 - 240
of 512
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
8 Aug 2011, 2:32 pm
*Tuesday, November 8:United States v. [read post]
31 Oct 2011, 7:00 am
United States, a case that presents questions about the relationship between religious speech and political speech for purposes of tax exemptions. [read post]
31 Oct 2018, 11:57 am
In State v. [read post]
31 Oct 2018, 11:57 am
In State v. [read post]
31 Oct 2018, 11:57 am
In State v. [read post]
26 Oct 2007, 9:12 am
Bryan Rose, following a Frye hearing, excluded the testimony of a forensic fingerprint examiner because the "ACE-V" methodology of latent fingerprint examination is more likely than not "a subjective, untested, unverifiable identification procedure that purports to be infallible. [read post]
27 Jun 2008, 3:00 pm
At page 51, Justice Scalia, writing for the court, cited a law review article entitled, “The Peculiar Story of United States v. [read post]
7 Jan 2014, 9:22 am
Pinkney v. [read post]
27 Apr 2022, 1:12 pm
Fund, Inc. v Gantt, 796 F Supp 681, 684 [ED NY 1992]). [read post]
27 Apr 2022, 1:12 pm
Fund, Inc. v Gantt, 796 F Supp 681, 684 [ED NY 1992]). [read post]
30 May 2012, 6:36 am
See Betz v. [read post]
2 May 2012, 3:47 am
Frye. [read post]
21 Mar 2012, 12:11 pm
First, in Lafler v. [read post]
14 Aug 2019, 1:44 pm
This was almost a universal standard in courts throughout the country after the Supreme Court’s 1923 decision in Frye v. [read post]
23 Jun 2010, 3:35 pm
State v. [read post]
10 Mar 2008, 1:10 pm
State,272 Ga. 540 (1) (533 SE2d 60) (2000); State of Ga. v. [read post]
12 Mar 2012, 9:36 am
Frye and Lafler v. [read post]
15 Jan 2014, 5:49 pm
Ferguson, II, and Adam Stein, working with lawyers of the NAACP Legal Defense & Educational Fund, Inc., successfully litigated civil rights cases and helped shape the contours of civil rights law by winning landmark United States Supreme Court rulings in such cases as Swann v. [read post]
22 Mar 2012, 7:58 am
Frye and Lafler v. [read post]
8 Mar 2016, 4:00 am
It wasn’t until AT&T v. [read post]
