Search for: "US v. Cain" Results 221 - 240 of 323
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
4 Nov 2014, 1:30 pm by Maureen Johnston
Cain 13-1433Issue: (1) Whether a state court that considers the evidence presented at a petitioner’s penalty phase proceeding as determinative of the petitioner’s claim of mental retardation under Atkins v. [read post]
8 Dec 2011, 1:15 pm by John Elwood
United States, 11-7029, and Cain v. [read post]
14 Jan 2016, 11:43 am by John Elwood
Cain, 14-10008, another fifth-time relist, asks a pair of questions about Brady and ineffective assistance of counsel. [read post]
8 Oct 2014, 9:00 am by Maureen Johnston
Leatherman Tool Group, Inc., as courts in at least seven states (including the court below) hold; or, instead, (2) use the rational-factfinder test of Jackson v. [read post]
14 Apr 2018, 4:18 pm by INFORRM
The decision was greeted with dismay by defendant lawyers and  newspapers, including the incredibly-talented Nicky Cain of RPC. [read post]
30 Sep 2015, 6:31 am by Jeff Welty
I am not sure whether any districts used the previous law; the new version seems more likely to be used. [read post]
30 Sep 2015, 6:31 am by Jeff Welty
I am not sure whether any districts used the previous law; the new version seems more likely to be used. [read post]
21 Nov 2015, 6:44 am by John Ehrett
Cain 14-10008Issue: (1) Whether the Louisiana courts erred in failing to find that the State’s failure to disclose exculpatory evidence violated its obligation under Brady v. [read post]
9 Apr 2024, 7:03 am by Robin E. Kobayashi
New York’s use of its famed Form “RB089” continues to work against some parties seeking full Board review. [read post]
16 Oct 2014, 7:57 am by John Elwood
Cain, 13-1433, is a capital case from the world’s prison capitol that asks “[w]hether a state court that considers evidence presented at a petitioner’s penalty phase proceeding as determinative of petitioner’s claim of mental retardation under Atkins v. [read post]
16 Nov 2010, 9:00 pm
That is at least the point that comes across from Justice Sotomayor's dissent from a denial of certiorari review in Pitre v. [read post]