Search for: "Commonwealth v. Melendez"
Results 21 - 40
of 59
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
10 Feb 2011, 10:42 pm
Washington, 541 U.S. 36 (2004) and Melendez-Diaz v. [read post]
5 May 2011, 10:09 pm
The Appeals Court addressed this issue in the case of Commonwealth v. [read post]
13 May 2008, 10:41 am
Massachusetts, No. 07-591, seeking review of Commonwealth v. [read post]
12 Sep 2009, 11:04 am
Here is a link to the Brief just filed on behalf of the 07-11191 Briscoe v. [read post]
14 Oct 2010, 10:46 pm
The case of Commonwealth v. [read post]
2 Sep 2009, 8:46 am
The case is a follow on to Crawford and Melendez-Diaz. [read post]
18 May 2011, 3:35 am
The case is Commonwealth v. [read post]
10 Jun 2011, 12:15 pm
The SJC announced its decision in the case of Commonwealth v. [read post]
27 Apr 2012, 6:56 am
Applying the “unique” Pennsylvania independence source rule, and pending two years before it was decided, is Commonwealth v. [read post]
19 Nov 2009, 5:08 am
On November 17, 2009 the Massachusetts Appeals Court issued its decision in Commonwealth v. [read post]
8 Sep 2009, 11:25 pm
Commonwealth v. [read post]
5 Dec 2007, 12:25 pm
Massachusetts, No. 07-591, seeking review of Commonwealth v. [read post]
5 Mar 2010, 11:14 pm
In Commonwealth v. [read post]
25 May 2011, 2:10 pm
In the Commonwealth v. [read post]
20 Dec 2010, 10:27 pm
Accordingly, the defendant argued that he was being denied his Sixth Amendment right of confrontation under the United States Supreme Court's Melendez-Diaz v. [read post]
3 Apr 2010, 12:19 pm
In the recent case of Commonwealth v. [read post]
19 Dec 2009, 8:29 am
First, some background: The case name is Commonwealth v. [read post]
19 Dec 2009, 8:29 am
First, some background: The case name is Commonwealth v. [read post]
23 Jun 2011, 8:27 am
The Bullcoming decision indicates that the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court's recent decision in Commonwealth v. [read post]
29 Jul 2011, 12:59 pm
The Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court has held the rule of Melendez-Diaz not to be retroactive — and it did so in Commonwealth v. [read post]
