Search for: "Grand Jury Witness, in Re" Results 421 - 440 of 804
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
14 Sep 2007, 8:15 pm
MI Dept Nat Res    Western District of Michigan at Grand RapidsKENNEDY, Circuit Judge. [read post]
13 Oct 2008, 10:37 am
Here are the facts in the case:On April 6, 2006, the Cuyahoga County Grand Jury indicted [Denise] Sherrills for . . . unauthorized use of a computer. [read post]
13 May 2008, 1:35 pm
Orsburn, No. 07-2584, 07-2585 Convictions for mail fraud are affirmed, but the sentences vacated and the case remanded for re-sentencing where the trial court applied the wrong Guidelines sentence when it concluded that embezzling money from the government fell under section 2C1.1 of the Guidelines which covers frauds that incl [read post]
1 Sep 2011, 3:42 am by Russ Bensing
  That might be true, but here it was Hyams’ pretrial acts that were the problem — his testimony before the grand jury, and his failure to inform prosecutors of what Stout had told him. [read post]
29 May 2015, 7:23 am by Ken White
They had already put witnesses before the grand jury, they had already used grand jury subpoenas to get Hastert's bank records, they already knew exactly how they would charge and prove up the structuring charge. [read post]
9 Aug 2011, 8:18 am by Gritsforbreakfast
...Once upon a time the grand jury system was devised as a way of protecting the reputations of those accused of crime unless there was sufficient evidence to warrant a trial. [read post]
17 Sep 2011, 8:06 am by Jeff Gamso
Not a Bad Idea, But Not Perfect  We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union,establish Justice, insure domesticTranquility, provide for the common defence,promote the general Welfare, and secure theBlessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for theUnited States of America.Amendment ICongress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the… [read post]
26 Nov 2019, 4:39 am by Jack Goldsmith
“[W]e’re not saying we’re telling the actual story, we’re telling our story,” he told IndieWire. [read post]
4 Jan 2019, 8:51 am by Ken White
The court reversed the perjury conviction, holding that: “The primary function of the Grand Jury is to uncover crimes and misconduct in public office for the purpose of prosecution … It is not properly a principal aim of the Grand Jury, however, to ‘create’ new crimes in the course of its proceedings. [read post]
13 Jun 2007, 2:13 am
" Witt: did Nifong tell you to withhold or sugarcoat information to grand jury? [read post]
5 Dec 2014, 5:45 am by SHG
Replacing grand juries with preliminary hearings is an interesting proposal. [read post]
10 Apr 2009, 5:12 am
The next day, I was in front of the grand jury for maybe 30 minutes tops. [read post]
24 Aug 2010, 11:06 am by Rusty Shackleford
If you’re ever in court, for any reason, whether as a plaintiff, defendant, juror, or witness, it’s in your interest to impress upon the judge that you appreciate the seriousness of the proceedings. [read post]
7 Jun 2010, 8:06 am by Jeff Gamso
  (I've put it in boldface so it's easy to find.)No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the Militia, when in actual service in time of War or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offence to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a… [read post]
13 Dec 2017, 4:38 am by SHG
“We’re a bit presumptuous as expert witnesses that our testimony matters that much,” Champod said. [read post]
16 Jan 2020, 12:16 pm by Hilary Hurd
These conversations are important, and they’re endlessly fascinating theoretically. [read post]
4 Nov 2022, 5:40 am by JURIST Staff
It was, in fact, so bold that a Texas Grand Jury, hand-picked by Mr. [read post]
14 Apr 2017, 6:42 am by Joy Waltemath
This is a case at law, not equity, and the jury should hear the testimony of the witnesses in accordance with the legal tradition established by our Founders. [read post]