Search for: "Davis v. State"
Results 2901 - 2920
of 6,175
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
28 Jun 2017, 8:23 am
Davis, also resulted in a defendant loss. [read post]
28 Jun 2017, 8:23 am
Davis, also resulted in a defendant loss. [read post]
28 Jun 2017, 8:23 am
Davis, also resulted in a defendant loss. [read post]
10 Apr 2022, 10:30 pm
”); see also Davis v. [read post]
28 Jul 2007, 9:32 am
The state court's resolution of this claim represents an unreasonable application of Supreme Court Confrontation Clause jurisprudence, most notably Davis v. [read post]
15 Oct 2010, 8:42 am
In his original order, Judge Davis declined to reach the constitutional issues, citing United States v. [read post]
16 Apr 2022, 6:01 am
” On March 23, 2022, in Weston Family Partnership v. [read post]
16 Apr 2022, 6:01 am
” On March 23, 2022, in Weston Family Partnership v. [read post]
27 Jan 2009, 9:42 am
Interestingly, the day after Stinson was charged with a crime, the 11th Circuit Court of Appeals decided Davis v. [read post]
15 Jul 2018, 9:01 pm
Davis v. [read post]
5 Mar 2024, 1:51 pm
Indeed, Jefferson Davis raised the Fourteenth Amendment in just such a defensive context. [read post]
25 Apr 2007, 6:23 am
Davis v. [read post]
15 Jul 2009, 3:28 pm
Davis. [5] Notwithstanding this state of affairs, I am satisfied there should be a recording. [read post]
28 Apr 2023, 6:30 am
Katz, Sabastian V. [read post]
5 Jun 2014, 4:36 am
Just in time for the SEC’s 80th birthday (tomorrow is 80 years since the ’34 Act was signed into law), comes this news from Paul Weiss (we will be posting memos in our “SEC Enforcement” Practice Area): Yesterday, the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit issued a significant decision in SEC v. [read post]
28 Apr 2023, 6:30 am
Katz, Sabastian V. [read post]
26 May 2017, 6:29 am
Court of Appeals for the 6th Circuit properly held that the alleged instructional error was harmful and that Davis v. [read post]
27 Feb 2010, 3:53 pm
And in Davis v. [read post]
9 Sep 2024, 6:36 am
An Iowa court held the private-employer drug-testing law is not, however, part of the state’s Workers’ Compensation Act and the “split sample” requirement does not apply to post-injury testing of injured workers [see Davis v. [read post]
28 Jun 2016, 4:30 am
Coverage of the four-four tie in United States v. [read post]
