Search for: "Doe v. People"
Results 341 - 360
of 35,807
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
8 May 2024, 2:00 pm
Some people really like their guns, and some people really don't like any government involvement with them at all. [read post]
17 Jun 2016, 12:10 pm
If he is, then yeah, he does the full 32 months. [read post]
17 Apr 2013, 1:08 pm
And a portion of Justice Mallano's opinion does precisely that. [read post]
16 Feb 2015, 12:24 pm
The Court of Appeal uses "Jane Doe" and initials, whereas the more robust newspaper story uses actual names. [read post]
30 Aug 2016, 11:07 am
The California Court of Appeal understandably concludes that his subsequent conviction for attempted murder does not automatically disqualify him for relief under Prop. 36.But Mr. [read post]
17 Dec 2013, 12:17 pm
No loss on your end.The Court of Appeal, unfortunately, does not have an equivalent luxury. [read post]
28 Mar 2023, 5:58 pm
This opinion does not exemplify the type of cooperative and loving family dynamic that you'll see in, say, 1950s television shows:"On the day of the offense, defendant was angry at his mother, saying she was “evil” and deserved to die. [read post]
30 Dec 2015, 1:44 pm
The case before the Court is Doe v. [read post]
5 Oct 2021, 10:12 am
Case citation: Tanner v. [read post]
10 Sep 2020, 5:17 am
We have received many questions from people wanting to know how the United States Supreme Court decision in Birchfield v. [read post]
23 Nov 2018, 1:35 pm
20181123102318117 Trump v Karnoski Pet (PDF)20181123102318117 Trump v Karnoski Pet (Text) 20181123105704864 Trump v Doe (PDF)20181123105704864 Trump v Doe (Text) 20181123110512287 Trump v Stockman (PDF)20181123110512287 Trump v Stockman (Text) [read post]
19 May 2007, 9:18 pm
The whole deal in the CAFC opinion in KSR v. [read post]
20 Apr 2020, 2:51 pm
Just because one is self-represented surely does not mean that everything one does is "attributed to [one's] self-represented status. [read post]
15 Jun 2014, 3:25 pm
In the case of People v Scott, 63 NY2d 518 [1984], the criminal court held that a roadblock or checkpoint stop is a seizure within the meaning of the Fourth Amendment. [read post]
4 Aug 2008, 7:25 pm
That's an important -- and interesting -- holding, and does conflict a tiny bit (albeit in an arguably distinguishable way) with some other holdings.But let me focus less on the doctrinal merits here than on a passage in the opinion that quotes some of the dialogue below. [read post]
23 May 2011, 4:47 pm
In People ex rel. [read post]
14 Nov 2007, 9:01 am
In Arista v. [read post]
29 Apr 2008, 7:28 am
In Arista v. [read post]
25 Sep 2007, 3:54 am
Does 1-11Declaration of Moshe D. [read post]
23 Apr 2009, 6:03 am
In Arista Records v. [read post]
