Search for: "Padilla v. Kentucky"
Results 301 - 320
of 516
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
31 Mar 2010, 9:02 am
Supreme Court holds that criminal defense counsel has a Sixth Amendment obligation to inform a defendant about immigration consequences or to advise when consequences are clear. http://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/09pdf/08-651.pdf The case, Padilla v. [read post]
27 Jan 2011, 3:40 pm
The key holding is that the United States Supreme Court’s ruling in Padilla v Kentucky applies to sex offender registry consequences. [read post]
31 Mar 2010, 9:00 pm
" Padilla v. [read post]
8 Jun 2011, 8:04 am
Kentucky, 559 U.S. __, 130 S. [read post]
30 Apr 2012, 12:42 pm
was granted in Chaidez is as follows: In Padilla v. [read post]
26 Oct 2011, 5:37 am
Hofstra Michael Pinard (Maryland Law) presents “Padilla v. [read post]
12 Oct 2009, 3:49 pm
Specifically, these three (of my list of top 10) sentencing cases to watch this term are to be argued in the next two days (with links and descriptions from SCOTUSwiki): To be argued Tuesday, October 13: Padilla v. [read post]
10 Apr 2011, 9:37 pm
Padilla v. [read post]
9 May 2010, 10:49 pm
Kentucky. [read post]
31 Mar 2010, 8:07 am
In the final ruling issued today, Justice John Paul Stevens delivered the opinion of the Court in Padilla v. [read post]
25 Sep 2010, 5:20 am
Kentucky) or a missed deadline for filing a federal habeas petition (Holland v. [read post]
18 Nov 2024, 6:30 am
That case was Padilla v. [read post]
31 Mar 2010, 7:31 am
In Padilla v. [read post]
21 Oct 2010, 9:53 am
Here is the abstract: Padilla v. [read post]
1 May 2013, 2:14 pm
The 2010 Supreme Court decision, Padilla v. [read post]
27 Oct 2010, 2:36 pm
Up to date with defense counsel's obligation as considered in Padilla v Kentucky. [read post]
22 Aug 2012, 4:13 am
Supreme Court issued its landmark holding in Padilla v. [read post]
31 Mar 2010, 2:10 pm
" The case, Padilla v. [read post]
2 May 2014, 12:28 pm
Each of these cases asks whether Padilla v. [read post]
8 Mar 2010, 9:53 am
Buono, 08–472 (involving an Establishment Clause challenge to a cross used in a war memorial that Congress later transferred to a private entity); Jose “Not that One” Padilla v. [read post]
