Search for: "Defendant Doe 2"
Results 4361 - 4380
of 40,581
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
21 Dec 2020, 11:56 am
Specifically, the defendant argues the evidence does not show that he used actual force, fraud, or trickery to remove the victim. [read post]
18 May 2020, 8:44 am
Id. at *2-6. [read post]
21 Mar 2007, 6:21 pm
The prosecutor articulated it as such: In the instant case, the offense of conviction, misprision of felony, requires proof that: "1) the principal committed and completed the alleged felony; 2) defendant had full knowledge of that fact; 3) defendant failed to notify the authorities; and 4) defendant took steps to conceal the crime. [read post]
26 Jul 2012, 4:03 am
So How Does it Work? [read post]
26 Jul 2012, 4:03 am
So How Does it Work? [read post]
28 Jul 2010, 10:45 am
’” 2. [read post]
20 Dec 2010, 5:53 am
It’s what causation and reliance mean: did the defendant's alleged conduct make any difference? [read post]
11 Mar 2022, 6:49 am
His ruling does not bind the other judges on the court any more than their rulings on the subject bind Judge Nichols. [read post]
22 May 2012, 7:35 am
The technician was (1) unprepared for the visit with proper technical equipment and (2) went outside of the scope of his job to investigate the defendant's computer for child pornography - a clear invasion of the defendant's privacy. [read post]
4 Oct 2013, 3:31 pm
Accordingly, 40 points had to be deducted from the instrument, so that the Total Risk Factor Score for the defendant was not 135, but 95, and the Presumptive Risk Level was 2, not 3. [read post]
5 Feb 2016, 11:36 am
In order to prove that the defendant is guilty under a theory of reckless conduct, the Commonwealth must prove three things beyond a reasonable doubt: (1) that the alleged victim was under fourteen years of age; (2) that the defendant intentionally engaged in actions which caused bodily injury to the alleged victim; and (3) that the defendant’s actions amounted to reckless conduct. [read post]
5 Nov 2013, 1:14 pm
CPL 270.20 (2), applicable to the instant case pursuant to CPL 360.25 (2), reads, in relevant part that an erroneous ruling by the court allowing a challenge for cause by the people does not constitute reversible error unless the people have exhausted their peremptory challenges at the time or exhaust them before the selection of the jury is complete. [read post]
7 Feb 2013, 11:31 am
Defendant argues, on appeal, that: (1) his motion for new trial should have been granted; (2) two jurors should have been dismissed for cause; and (3) the jury instruction on diminished capacity was improper. [read post]
8 Feb 2017, 3:26 pm
Defendant appealed. [read post]
1 May 2011, 8:25 am
§ 778.114, because the evidence showed that Defendant docked Plaintiff’s pay on at least 2 occasions when Plaintiff worked fewer than 40 hours in a workweek. [read post]
2 Jun 2015, 4:20 am
2. [read post]
25 Jun 2008, 5:52 pm
" NFP criminal opinions today (2): Paul Mayes v. [read post]
14 Feb 2012, 7:16 am
In 2010, the Tenth Circuit held that a “use in commerce” existed where the plaintiff’s mark was used to promote a defendant’s services and consumers were provided with a link to a website where it could purchase products from the defendant. 1-800 Contacts, Inc. v. [read post]
14 Feb 2012, 8:04 am
In order to prevail on a claim for trademark infringement, a plaintiff must establish that he or she: 1) has a valid, registered trademark that is entitled to protection; 2) that the defendant used the mark; 3) that the use was in commerce; 4) that the use was in connection with the sale or advertising of goods or services; and 5) that the use was without the plaintiff’s consent. 1-800 Contacts, Inc. v. [read post]
2 Mar 2009, 9:00 pm
"2. [read post]
