Search for: "State v. Blakely"
Results 281 - 300
of 929
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
24 Nov 2008, 3:34 pm
" With all due respect, Professor Sunstein, I blogged through a Sixth Amendment revolution with Blakely; I knew Blakely was revolutionary because lower courts started striking down all sorts of federal and state laws based on Blakely; this constitutional sentencing revolution had been a friend of mine. [read post]
19 Jan 2009, 3:45 am
Three years ago, in State v. [read post]
2 Apr 2019, 9:04 pm
On April 1, Rothert and Blake again told federal Judge Fernando J. [read post]
21 Dec 2007, 2:47 am
U.S. v. [read post]
14 Aug 2012, 6:34 pm
But, another two years after that, in Blakely v. [read post]
5 Feb 2024, 4:22 pm
Since Mrs Justice Collins Rice handed down judgment in Fox v Blake [2024] EWHC 146 (KB) there has been a lot of online discussion about the case. [read post]
21 Mar 2007, 9:21 am
Minnesota (06-8273): "Are state supreme courts required to use the standard announced in Teague v. [read post]
25 Apr 2022, 4:00 am
From SSRN:Nelson Tebbe & Micah Schwartzman, The Politics of Proportionality, (120 Michigan Law Review 1307 (2022)).Guy Baldwin, The Coronavirus Pandemic and Religious Freedom: Judicial Decisions in the United States and United Kingdom, ((2022) Judicial Review).Christopher Mills, Blake Davis & Richard Osborne, Is Viability Dicta? [read post]
11 Dec 2024, 4:02 am
., Inc. v. [read post]
14 Apr 2007, 7:48 am
United States v. [read post]
1 Mar 2014, 4:41 pm
His Lordship stated at p. [read post]
1 May 2009, 3:45 am
Back in 2006, in State v. [read post]
1 Dec 2023, 12:09 pm
Blake’s records, which explicitly stated Sutton had “spondylosis without myelopathy,” suggesting that this contradicted Sutton’s claim of having myelopathy. [read post]
18 Apr 2010, 7:30 am
The style of this Federal case is, David Lewis Builders, Inc. v. [read post]
9 Mar 2020, 2:49 am
MS (Pakistan) v Secretary of State for the Home Department, heard 21 November 2019. [read post]
8 Nov 2016, 11:42 am
V. [read post]
6 May 2016, 2:36 pm
Espinosa turned over his check to the Dept. of State on Thursday, in the amount of $5,843.00. [read post]
22 Dec 2016, 5:17 am
Even though his situation was “unfortunate”, reliance placed in Basnet [2012] UKUT 113 (IAC) was rejected because Blake J’s remarks in that case are not constitutive of “a universal rule”. [read post]
17 Apr 2007, 10:10 am
As Lyle Denniston notes, now the earliest-argued case still undecided is "James v. [read post]
19 Feb 2007, 5:54 am
In State v. [read post]
