Search for: "Cross v. State" Results 4041 - 4060 of 16,701
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
7 Oct 2019, 6:00 am by Brian Gallini
Specifically, Syed argued that the State failed to disclose potentially exculpatory evidence (a fax cover sheet disclaiming the reliability of the cell phone records), which violated the State’s duty imposed by Brady v. [read post]
20 Jul 2023, 6:00 am by Public Employment Law Press
Similarly, petitioner's newly-asserted New York State unspecified constitutional religious freedom argument may not be considered for the first time on reargument, and, in any event, it is unavailing (see Kane v De Blasio, 623 F Supp 3d 339 [SD NY 2022] [City policy requiring workers in school settings to be vaccinated not unconstitutional]). [read post]
20 Jul 2023, 6:00 am by Public Employment Law Press
Similarly, petitioner's newly-asserted New York State unspecified constitutional religious freedom argument may not be considered for the first time on reargument, and, in any event, it is unavailing (see Kane v De Blasio, 623 F Supp 3d 339 [SD NY 2022] [City policy requiring workers in school settings to be vaccinated not unconstitutional]). [read post]
3 Apr 2013, 11:45 am by Conor McEvily
Perry (challenging California’s Proposition 8) and United States v. [read post]
14 Aug 2012, 6:34 pm by Michael M. O'Hear
Cross posted at Life Sentences. [read post]
25 Feb 2010, 8:45 am by Orin Kerr
The following commentary is cross-posted on The Volokh Conspiracy. [read post]
27 Feb 2012, 3:49 pm by Lovechilde
By John Knox, cross-posted from Center for Progressive Reform On February 28, the Supreme Court will hear argument in Kiobel v Royal Dutch Petroleum, a case with far-reaching implications for efforts to hold corporations accountable when they commit or are complicit in abuses of human rights. [read post]
1 Feb 2016, 7:05 am by Second Circuit Civil Rights Blog
That is what the Court of Appeals is telling us in a ruling that vacates a conviction for unlawful possession of a firearm.The case is United States v. [read post]