Search for: "People v. Render"
Results 2461 - 2480
of 5,283
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
9 Feb 2016, 6:55 am
In 2005, Succar v. [read post]
2 Feb 2016, 8:44 pm
He also proudly proclaims his identity as a democratic socialist and his esteem for Eugene V. [read post]
27 Jan 2016, 6:30 am
Defendant hit the vehicle with enough force to break his bicycle at the handlebars, rendering it inoperable. [read post]
27 Jan 2016, 4:39 am
As said by the Supreme Court of Canada in R. v. [read post]
27 Jan 2016, 4:39 am
As said by the Supreme Court of Canada in R. v. [read post]
26 Jan 2016, 3:39 am
Bryant, Jr. v. [read post]
25 Jan 2016, 2:01 pm
Patel: Don't worry like I said only people with the link can view it!! [read post]
22 Jan 2016, 9:42 am
" Jones v. [read post]
22 Jan 2016, 8:12 am
Lee, 15-446, presenting two questions about review of decisions rendered by the Patent and Trial Appeal Board; Microsoft Corp. v. [read post]
21 Jan 2016, 1:46 pm
Some people are claiming it did. [read post]
21 Jan 2016, 8:00 am
Theoretically, this essay argues that these contexts are useful, if not essential, to understanding most high-profile, high-significance lawsuits, like Dred Scott v. [read post]
21 Jan 2016, 4:00 am
The federal Minister of Justice, as the chief lawmaker, is too close to the prosecution of a case to render an impartial decision when approached with a post-conviction review application. [read post]
19 Jan 2016, 9:30 am
The third context highlights other people who had a stake in the outcome. [read post]
18 Jan 2016, 5:02 pm
Last week's post discussed People v Jones (2015 NY Slip Op 09773), in which the Appellate Division, Fourth Department, reversed a conviction in the interest of justice due to numerous acts of prosecutorial misconduct in summation which were egregious, but largely unpreserved by timely objection. [read post]
18 Jan 2016, 5:02 pm
Last week's post discussed People v Jones (2015 NY Slip Op 09773), in which the Appellate Division, Fourth Department, reversed a conviction in the interest of justice due to numerous acts of prosecutorial misconduct in summation which were egregious, but largely unpreserved by timely objection. [read post]
18 Jan 2016, 5:00 am
Our poston Yates v. [read post]
14 Jan 2016, 6:12 am
Briere v. [read post]
13 Jan 2016, 5:05 pm
John Reed Stark David Fontaine In this day and age, the members of the boards of directors of most companies understand that cybersecurity issues are both important and should be a board-level priority. [read post]
12 Jan 2016, 4:00 am
” In People v Glynn, 21 NY3d 614, the Court of Appeals said that “Unless disqualification is required under Judiciary Law §14, a judge's decision on a recusal motion is one of discretion. [read post]
11 Jan 2016, 6:25 am
Louis Vuitton Malletier, S.A. v. [read post]
