Search for: "State v. Person" Results 461 - 480 of 75,974
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
30 Mar 2020, 6:58 am by Daily Record Staff
Criminal procedure — Motion to suppress evidence — Search of person In response to an anonymous tip, Baltimore City police officers recovered a gun from appellant John Faulkner’s person, and arrested him. [read post]
10 Oct 2019, 8:04 am by Daily Record Staff
Criminal law — Sufficiency of the evidence — Drug kingpin Tormarco Harris’ case requires us to consider whether and under what circumstances our laws prohibit a person who is not a licensed healthcare provider from directing other persons who are licensed healthcare providers to supply medically unnecessary or excessive opioid pain medicines to patients. [read post]
11 Jul 2011, 9:32 am by Jack Pringle
The North Carolina Business Litigation Report has a great post about two United States Supreme Court decisions issued late last month and addressing for the first time in decades the issue of personal jurisdiction.In J. [read post]
3 May 2024, 4:05 pm by Lawrence Solum
Gaughan (Drake University - Law School) has posted The Unsettled State of Corporate General Personal Jurisdiction (Nebraska Law Review, Vol. 103, 2024) on SSRN. [read post]
30 Jun 2010, 8:38 am by Laura Orr
(Even if the officer can recite “Miranda Warnings” by heart, and most can, they are not infrequently advised to read them from a printed card, primarily to avoid any dispute over dropped words or phrases, however inadvertent.)The June 30, 2010, Oregon Court of Appeals case, State v. [read post]
16 May 2015, 4:03 pm by INFORRM
In Kerner v (1) WX (2) YZ (Persons Unknown), Mr Justice Warby has continued an harassment injunction and ordered disclosure against the DVLA so that the claimants can obtain details which may track down the respondents, a photographer and his associate. [read post]
2 Apr 2012, 4:48 pm by constitutional lawblogger
In a much-anticipated opinion today, the United States Supreme Court in Florence v. [read post]
19 Aug 2015, 1:30 am by Matrix
The Supreme Court in R (Tigere) v Secretary of State for Business Innovation and Skills [2015] UKSC 57 held by a 3:2 majority that the blanket requirement that all applicants for a student loan have “indefinite leave to remain” is discriminatory and must be amended by the Government. [read post]