Search for: "Speed v. State"
Results 441 - 460
of 4,295
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
1 May 2009, 1:29 pm
Federal Rule of Evidence 803(8)(B) (like most state counterparts) provides an exception to the rule against hearsay for Records, reports, statements, or data compilations, in any form, of public offices or agencies, setting forth...matters observed pursuant to duty imposed by... [read post]
29 Jun 2008, 4:52 pm
United States v. [read post]
19 Apr 2013, 10:47 am
United States v. [read post]
8 May 2022, 9:01 pm
In directing certification to the state court, the Court added: The importance of speed in resolution of the instant case is manifest. [read post]
11 Jun 2015, 5:51 am
Kipp v. [read post]
15 May 2019, 12:56 pm
Circuit’s decision in United States v. [read post]
30 Aug 2011, 4:30 am
State v. [read post]
14 Oct 2010, 12:02 am
The Grand Chamber of the European Court of Human rights yesterday heard the conjoined applications in Von Hannover v Germany and Springer v Germany. [read post]
2 Dec 2013, 5:00 am
Bannister v. [read post]
7 Mar 2008, 9:06 am
State v. [read post]
5 Apr 2024, 9:05 pm
Hall notes that under the test Justice Gorsuch articulates in his Gundy v. [read post]
22 Jul 2008, 1:30 pm
Johnson v. [read post]
25 May 2007, 7:42 am
Static Control Components, Inc. v. [read post]
18 Feb 2011, 2:00 am
As stated by the Tennessee Supreme Courtin Press v. [read post]
11 Mar 2022, 11:54 am
United States and Kahn v. [read post]
5 Sep 2011, 4:13 am
United States v. [read post]
26 May 2009, 2:14 am
PipeBomb.jpg In prosecution for conspiring to make and making a pipe bomb, demonstrative video showing three tests, played at three different speeds, was probative to show the devices were "destructive devices" and were not unfairly prejudicial based on the "bare allegation" that the bombs in the video were significantly different than the charged devices, in United States v. [read post]
15 Jun 2024, 8:02 am
Garland v. [read post]
15 Jun 2024, 8:02 am
Garland v. [read post]
6 Feb 2022, 10:00 pm
When the United States Supreme Court spoke to patent subject matter eligibility under Section 101 of the America Invents Act, the speed of U.S. patent prosecution took a decided downturn. [read post]
