Search for: "Loftis v. State"
Results 21 - 40
of 150
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
12 Jan 2016, 8:55 am
That was true in today’s unanimous opinion, authored by Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg, in Bruce v. [read post]
29 Jan 2009, 2:56 pm
Evid. 404(b); Campos v. [read post]
11 Sep 2013, 8:23 pm
In an interesting aside, defense counsel is not held to this same lofty standard. [read post]
18 Jan 2016, 7:13 am
It’s a lofty one, considering Fort Lauderdale has a horrible track record when it comes to traffic safety. [read post]
15 Jan 2018, 7:44 am
State v. [read post]
3 Nov 2017, 4:23 am
Davis and Wilson v. [read post]
31 May 2022, 9:11 pm
Indeed, in Doe v. [read post]
16 Nov 2006, 7:13 am
United States v. [read post]
4 Jan 2016, 6:16 am
As long as the Graham v. [read post]
17 Oct 2012, 5:30 pm
The unanimous decision in Young v. [read post]
8 Dec 2014, 3:56 pm
Sierra Club v. [read post]
2 Nov 2015, 3:00 am
United States, a challenge by two Maine men to their convictions for possession of a firearm after a domestic violence conviction. [read post]
29 Jun 2018, 9:05 am
While his rhetoric regarding federalism was lofty, his votes in concrete cases often did not match up. [read post]
24 Jul 2018, 3:10 am
In Loftis v. [read post]
8 Feb 2023, 3:29 pm
Washington State Commercial Passenger Fishing Vessel Association, 443 U.S. 658 (1979) and Washington v. [read post]
7 Feb 2012, 2:31 pm
On 4 October 2011 the Court of Justice duly delivered its ruling in Joined Cases C-403/08 Football Association Premier League Ltd, NetMed Hellas SA, Multichoice Hellas SA v QC Leisure, David Richardson, AV Station plc, Malcolm Chamberlain, Michael Madden, SR Leisure Ltd, Philip George Charles Houghton and Derek Owen and C-429/08 Karen Murphy v Media Protection Services Ltd (see IPKat post here), following which Mr Justice Kitchin -- having metaphorically vanished as Gandalf… [read post]
18 Dec 2007, 5:56 am
Cir. 1977)); Loftis v. [read post]
23 May 2012, 10:47 am
State & Cnty. [read post]
19 Mar 2017, 2:00 pm
In a scathing decision in Abdulaali v Salih, he stated, 1. [read post]
