Search for: "We Don't Judge - We Defend"
Results 241 - 260
of 420
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
24 Jun 2013, 9:15 am
When a person dies, heirs don't inherit these rights. [read post]
23 Jun 2013, 9:28 pm
"To put it differently," we continued, "a case announces a new rule if the result was not dictated by precedent existing at the time the defendant's conviction became final." [read post]
20 Jun 2013, 11:09 pm
If you don't know what this is, it probably isn't worth your time to learn it, but the gist of it is a formalistic, frequently misunderstood approach to determining when a defendant has a prior conviction for purposes of the Armed Career Criminal Act and other similar statutes, instigated by a case called Taylor. [read post]
20 Jun 2013, 4:01 pm
There are also three judge death penalty cases where I could figure out that the defendant would prevail by composition of the panel. [read post]
20 Jun 2013, 4:49 am
In light of defendant’s repeated, unreasonable delays and denials, and its willingness to ignore a 2006 finding and award issued by the Workers’ Compensation Appeals Board, we will refer this case to the Audit Unit of the Division of Workers’ Compensation. [read post]
19 Jun 2013, 10:55 pm
If we think the criminal trial system currently doesn't work that way-- that juries take what the prosecutors say at face value even if the defense attorney vigorously disagrees and the judge tells them that both sides are advocates-- we have much bigger problems. [read post]
19 Jun 2013, 5:47 pm
But 20 pages seems like a lot of words to say we don't have it. [read post]
18 Jun 2013, 12:00 pm
We imposed the sentence, perhaps as required by law. [read post]
18 Jun 2013, 4:42 am
We get to laugh, just like we get to laugh at stuff like this: [read post]
17 Jun 2013, 1:46 pm
But, as I have discussed on the blog previously, this reasoning leads to the "Bill & Ted" problem: "If we can trust the courts to do what is right, why don't we just have one statute that reads 'Be excellent to each other.' [read post]
13 Jun 2013, 9:08 am
'The whole concept of privacy is obsolete,' 'Gathering data about phone calls doesn't raise serious privacy concerns,' 'Surveillance is unobjectionable if it's been going on for many years,' 'We don't have to worry about the 4th Amendment as long as a judge is willing to rubber-stamp the government's actions without any adversarial process,' etc." [read post]
12 Jun 2013, 5:01 pm
If not, the judge or jury could ignore it. [read post]
11 Jun 2013, 4:21 pm
Experienced, wise, and temperate judges don't act like publicity seeking spoiled prima donnas. [read post]
11 Jun 2013, 4:54 am
But both HTC and ViewSonic still don't have a license to Nokia's non-SEPs (some of which Nokia would presumably be willing to license).Today Judge Dr. [read post]
11 Jun 2013, 2:18 am
After this exchange, Google went ahead and filed its motion, against Skyhook is now going to defend itself vigorously. [read post]
7 Jun 2013, 12:10 pm
Under the law, each and every defendant has the opportunity to fully challenge the patent before either a judge or jury and, if the patent is ever found invalid then that ruling will preclude the patentee from ever enforcing the same patent rights again against any party. [read post]
7 Jun 2013, 6:54 am
Well, at least now we know where to stuff those "government assurances." [read post]
5 Jun 2013, 12:54 pm
The sentence for the assault goes up, we don't bother with charging and convicting King for the rapes, and we rest our heads on the pillow of Williams v. [read post]
5 Jun 2013, 4:30 am
As one friend wrote on his Facebook wall, if you had a favorite character in GoT, maybe now you don't. [read post]
5 Jun 2013, 1:33 am
The June 4 Opinion In June 4, 2013 Opinion written by Judge José Cabranes for a unanimous three-judge panel, the Second Circuit affirmed Judge Sullivan’s ruling. [read post]
