Search for: "People v Melendez"
Results 21 - 40
of 126
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
15 Jul 2009, 9:24 am
That's the title of a report in today's Washington Post on the aftermath of the Supreme Court's ruling in Melendez-Diaz v. [read post]
21 Sep 2009, 3:14 am
This past summer, in Melendez-Diaz v. [read post]
20 Nov 2011, 5:00 pm
In Melendez-Diaz v Massachusetts (129 S.Ct. 2527 [2009]), the Supreme Court held that it violate the right of confrontation for a prosecutor to submit a chemical drug test report without the testimony of a person who performed the test subject to confrontation. [read post]
6 Feb 2012, 5:12 am
Melendez v. [read post]
20 Feb 2008, 6:30 am
The New York Court of Appeals weighed in yesterday with a decision, People v. [read post]
23 Jun 2011, 9:28 am
New Mexico, the sequel to Melendez-Diaz v. [read post]
21 Sep 2009, 2:16 pm
Virginia, although Melendez-Diaz v. [read post]
3 Jul 2009, 4:31 pm
Melendez-Diaz v. [read post]
5 Dec 2007, 12:25 pm
California, No. 07-6053, seeking review of People v. [read post]
11 May 2009, 3:47 am
The US Supreme Court has finished oral argument for the term, and about the only key criminal case still undecided is Melendez-Diaz v. [read post]
21 Aug 2009, 3:41 am
You can get a copy of the National Innocence Project’s amicus brief in Melendez-Diaz v. [read post]
20 Apr 2012, 3:47 am
Melendez, 2012 U.S. [read post]
19 Jan 2019, 9:14 am
Mitchell v. [read post]
11 Jun 2009, 9:30 am
The case is People v. [read post]
12 Nov 2008, 8:30 am
So what can possibly be at issue in Melendez-Diaz v. [read post]
19 Apr 2016, 6:44 pm
In People v. [read post]
18 Sep 2007, 9:09 pm
:We also find reversible error in the trial court's almost continuous interference, during cross examination of the People's witnesses, in defense counsel's exploration of issues relevant to defendant's intent to sell (see People v Canto, 31 AD3d 312 [2006], lv denied 7 NY3d 900 [2006]; People v Melendez, 31 AD3d 186 [2006], lv denied 7 NY3d 927 [2006]; People v Retamozzo, 25 AD3d 73 [2005]; People… [read post]
27 Jun 2024, 7:29 am
Melendez-Diaz v. [read post]
9 Jan 2014, 2:42 pm
As the Court of Appeals has explained, where a police officer has probable cause to believe that the driver of an automobile has committed a traffic violation, a stop does not violate the state or federal constitutions and neither the primary motivation of the officer nor a determination of what a reasonable traffic officer would have done under the circumstances is relevant akin to People v Robinson and Whren v United States. [read post]
23 Aug 2009, 8:39 am
For example the Court of Appeals in People v Rawlins and People v Meekins (10 N.Y.3d 136 [2/19/2008]), considered how Crawford applies two categories of evidence: DNA reports and , fingerprints, comparisons. [read post]
