Search for: "Jones v. State" Results 4181 - 4200 of 6,828
Sort by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
24 Jan 2012, 3:02 am by SHG
Since the opinions were released yesterday morning, the blawgosphere has cranked out a ton of posts about what the Jones v. [read post]
23 Jan 2012, 10:41 pm by zshapiro
As I pointed out in a prior post the 1983 Supreme Court decision in United States v. [read post]
23 Jan 2012, 9:20 pm by Orin Kerr
(Orin Kerr) Tom Goldstein weighs in with some excellent points about United States v. [read post]
23 Jan 2012, 4:51 pm by Olivia
  Last year, TeenJury reported on United States v Jones, a case involving whether or not law enforcement agents need to obtain a search warrant before secretly attaching a GPS device to a suspect’s car. [read post]
23 Jan 2012, 1:57 pm by Paul Ohm
E.g., Smith, 442 U.S., at 742; United States v. [read post]
23 Jan 2012, 1:49 pm
By Mike Dorf No doubt many casual observers were stunned by the fact that today's Supreme Court decision in United States v. [read post]
23 Jan 2012, 1:19 pm by Orin Kerr
Sotomayor joined one and indicated strongly that she would likely favor the other, but she didn’t need to reach that; doing would have required a United States v. [read post]
23 Jan 2012, 1:07 pm by Tom Goldstein
As a result, I think that although the government lost Jones 9-0, it did far better than everyone has recognized so far. [read post]
23 Jan 2012, 12:55 pm by Kenneth Anderson
(Kenneth Anderson) Although the big news today is the Supreme Court opinion in Jones, we also have the Fourth Circuit dismissing the Padilla appeal in a Bivens claim. [read post]
23 Jan 2012, 12:54 pm by admin
A few months ago, I wrote about the arguments being heard by the United States Supreme Court in the case of United States v. [read post]
23 Jan 2012, 12:38 pm by Robert Chesney
  Now we have a Supreme Court decision (United States v. [read post]
23 Jan 2012, 11:55 am by Kali Borkoski
This morning the Court issued its decision in the GPS tracking case United States v. [read post]