Search for: "Case v. People"
Results 4461 - 4480
of 52,001
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
4 Mar 2015, 4:00 pm
Many people assume a criminal case ends upon conviction and sentencing. [read post]
7 Nov 2008, 3:01 pm
In the English case, Brady v. [read post]
4 Mar 2019, 8:56 am
” In a footnote in that case, Trinity Lutheran Church v. [read post]
5 Jun 2013, 9:15 am
And while a lot of people have written things about Maryland v. [read post]
20 Jun 2016, 4:43 pm
Facts of the Case In the case of Betterman v. [read post]
10 May 2022, 9:02 pm
Wade in Dobbs v. [read post]
14 Mar 2021, 5:38 pm
Michael Steinberg Colorado Criminal Defense Lawyer Introduction – Your Rights Under the Fourth Amendment While I have written on this subject before, a recent Colorado case, People v. [read post]
25 Jul 2021, 5:13 am
Michael Steinberg Colorado Criminal Defense Lawyer Introduction – A Massive ChangeTo Plea Bargains in the Colorado Criminal Justice System Quietly, with little fanfare, the Colorado Supreme Court, in the case of People of the State of Colorado, v. [read post]
13 Jan 2011, 6:16 am
The case, White v. [read post]
6 Jun 2011, 5:05 am
In a recent case, Goodman v. [read post]
3 May 2012, 9:03 am
Since we have a HIPPA compliant judge this term in the Bronx Civil Court, I found a case, albeit criminal, which while not on point, shows the limits of HIPPA: People v Jaikaran,2012 NY Slip Op 03464 (2d Dept. 2012) “Here, the hospital records were properly certified (see CPLR 4518[a]; CPL 60.10) [MY NOTE: DID THEY MEAN [...] [read post]
21 Nov 2021, 12:06 pm
In the COVID-19 cases, he explained to me, the Court risks turning free exercise into something he never imagined: a right to kill people. [read post]
2 Jun 2010, 8:42 am
On June 1, 2010, the Michigan Supreme Court issued an order amending its May 25, 2010 order in People v Tate, No. [read post]
26 Jun 2007, 3:21 pm
Today in People v Young, 2007 NY Slip Op 05558, the First Department reiterated a previous holding that when a defendant forfeits his right to be present at trial, a trial court is not obligated to acquire and employ some type of electronic communication device so that the defendant can monitor the proceedings. [read post]
30 Oct 2020, 10:56 am
The case, People’s Tr. [read post]
15 Sep 2012, 9:40 pm
In that lengthy post, I described the procedural history of People v. [read post]
13 Jan 2011, 6:16 am
The case, White v. [read post]
1 Apr 2010, 4:10 am
In People v. [read post]
23 Oct 2007, 4:53 pm
(People), No. [read post]
7 May 2015, 12:50 pm
The result in People v. [read post]
