Search for: "Mitchell v. Walker" Results 21 - 40 of 69
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
14 Sep 2011, 10:27 am by Mary L. Dudziak
:Insurrections & Infections: Rethinking the Legal History of Atlanta, 1920-1940 – InmanChair - Robert Baker, Georgia State UniversityPolly Price, Emory University, “Federalization of the Mosquito: Malaria and Public Health In the Southern United States, 1900-1945”Maryan Soliman, University of Pennsylvania, “Racial Equality on Trial in Atlanta during the 1930s”Anders Walker, Saint Louis University, “Scarlett’s Rainbow: Margaret Mitchell,… [read post]
12 Oct 2007, 4:06 am
Rhonda Walker, No. 96,691 (Johnson)Direct appeal (petition for review); ManufactureRyan J. [read post]
18 Jun 2011, 2:53 am by Mike
Criminal cases heard by the Supreme Court include the case of Nat Fraser v Her Majesty's Advocate 2003 - an appeal against a sentence for murder - and an appeal by Luke Mitchell against the conviction for attempted murder of his 14 year-old girlfriend. [read post]
18 Jun 2011, 2:53 am by Mike
Criminal cases heard by the Supreme Court include the case of Nat Fraser v Her Majesty's Advocate 2003 - an appeal against a sentence for murder - and an appeal by Luke Mitchell against the conviction for attempted murder of his 14 year-old girlfriend. [read post]
17 Jun 2010, 1:31 pm by Randall Hodgkinson
Maurice Walker, No. 99,457 (Wyandotte)Direct appeal (petition for review); PossessionRyan J. [read post]
2 Sep 2013, 11:14 am
Helvering v Mitchell ruled that double jeopardy protection may be extended to proceedings that are not nominally criminal. [read post]
5 Oct 2016, 4:46 am by Edith Roberts
Scott Walker of Wisconsin. [read post]
29 Aug 2018, 2:30 am by Lyle Denniston
  In December 1970, the Court split 5-to-4 in the case of Oregon v. [read post]
24 Sep 2017, 8:55 am by Walter Olson
Rainwater (Fifth Circuit 1977) and more (LaFave et al.), Walker v. [read post]
5 Jun 2012, 2:00 pm by John Elwood
Walker, 11-1011, another Sixth Circuit state-on-top habeas case, which presents a question left open two Terms ago in Wood v. [read post]