Search for: "California v. Brady"
Results 301 - 320
of 329
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
7 Jul 2008, 8:09 pm
" This is known as a harmless error, from California v. [read post]
10 Jun 2008, 2:36 pm
Supreme Court, June 02, 2008 US v. [read post]
27 May 2008, 9:50 am
Ctr. for Women v. [read post]
19 May 2008, 8:55 am
Supreme Court, May 12, 2008 Gonzales v. [read post]
13 May 2008, 1:35 pm
U.S. 1st Circuit Court of Appeals, May 07, 2008 US v. [read post]
11 May 2008, 9:17 am
United States v. [read post]
29 Apr 2008, 7:13 am
Rule 8(b) and Rule 14; and 2) the government violated Brady, when it failed to produce arguably exculpatory evidence with respect to a charged co-conspirator until the week of trial. [read post]
14 Apr 2008, 11:34 am
U.S. 1st Circuit Court of Appeals, April 10, 2008 US v. [read post]
8 Apr 2008, 9:47 am
Inc. v. [read post]
25 Mar 2008, 1:09 pm
Miller, No. 06-11078 A conviction for tax evasion is affirmed where: 1) sufficient evidence supported the jury's verdict; 2) there was no abuse of discretion in various evidentiary rulings by the district court; 3) a claim the indictment was duplicitous failed as defendant was not prejudiced; and 4) a Brady claim failed as the cumulative effect of the suppressed evidence at issue did not undermine confidence in the verdict. [read post]
11 Mar 2008, 8:46 am
Phillips, No. 07-0522 Grant of habeas petition ordering conviction be vacated based on state's Brady violation is vacated in part as to barring of retrial of count of depraved indifference murder as petitioner had not exhausted his state remedies with respect to that relief. [read post]
6 Mar 2008, 6:00 am
(Equilon Enterprises v. [read post]
3 Mar 2008, 12:13 pm
Bland, No. 06-3223 Conviction for bank robbery is affirmed where: 1) there was no Brady violation since evidence suppressed by the prosecution was not material to an issue at defendant's trial; and 2) the district court did not abuse its discretion in refusing to conduct an independent in camera review of the evidence in question. [read post]
5 Feb 2008, 8:11 am
Defendant's California conviction for grand theft from a person in violation of section 487(2) of the California Penal Code was a "violent felony" as defined in 18 U.S.C. section 924(e)(2)(B)(ii). [read post]
30 Jan 2008, 7:35 am
Supreme Court, January 22, 2008 Ali v. [read post]
22 Jan 2008, 11:47 am
U.S. 1st Circuit Court of Appeals, January 17, 2008 US v. [read post]
22 Jan 2008, 11:28 am
" California Appellate Districts, January 17, 2008 "Amtower v. [read post]
30 Nov 2007, 11:17 am
" Two years later, Printz v. [read post]
20 Nov 2007, 11:44 pm
Gun Case
Legal Times
The Supreme Court announced Tuesday it will take up the case of District of Columbia v. [read post]
26 Oct 2007, 11:45 am
Supreme Court's decision in Buckeye Check Cashing v. [read post]
