Search for: "JOHNSON v. DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS" Results 301 - 320 of 447
Sort by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
25 May 2011, 8:03 pm by cdw
 The Ohio Department of Rehabilitation & Corrections recommends, 7-0 clemency for Shawn Hawkins. [read post]
23 May 2011, 8:44 am by Edward Craven, Matrix Chambers.
The meaning of “miscarriage of justice” in s. 133 was previously considered by the House of Lords in R (Mullen) v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2004] UKHL 18; [2005] 1 AC 1. [read post]
22 May 2011, 5:33 pm by Ilya Somin
He also believes that Kelo v. [read post]
13 May 2011, 8:59 am by Steve Hall
After Rhode's botched execution, they filed an Open Records request to force the Georgia Department of Corrections (GDC) to disclose its source of sodium thiopental, while also requesting a stay of execution. [read post]
9 Apr 2011, 3:48 pm
The Bankruptcy Court corrected the error, after which the Court of Appeals resubmitted the case and reversed the judgment of the District Court. [read post]
1 Feb 2011, 6:06 pm by Law Lady
The trial judge properly allowed jurors to consider Ida McQueen's conversion claim and issued correct jury instructions on the standard for financial elder abuse, the 1st District Court of Appeal said.McQueen, 76, suffers from mild mental retardation and is wheelchair-bound.Health Care Reform: CHRISTIAN GROUP CHALLENGES HEALTH CARE REFORM BILL IN 6TH CIRCUIT, Thomas More Law Ctr. v. [read post]
24 Jan 2011, 2:09 pm by Aaron
Schultz: In a plurality opinion authored by Justice Chambers and joined by Justices Sanders, Stephens, James Johnson and Charles Johnson, the Court overturned Ms. [read post]
7 Nov 2010, 10:07 am by Howard Friedman
Florida Department of Corrections, 2010 U.S. [read post]
30 Sep 2010, 12:57 pm by Howard Wasserman
But note again, only two justices departed from what we might "expect. [read post]
26 Sep 2010, 7:01 pm by Howard Friedman
California Department of Corrections, 2010 U.S. [read post]
29 Jul 2010, 7:53 am by Jeff Gamso
In granting the injunction, she simply indicated that the Justice Department was likely, but not certain, to prevail on those points at a later trial in federal court. [read post]