Search for: "Defendant Doe 2"
Results 4901 - 4920
of 40,582
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
3 Nov 2010, 6:56 am
” Id. at *2 n.2. [read post]
24 Sep 2013, 5:38 pm
The defendant was arrested and subsequently arraigned on a misdemeanor accusatory instrument on November 2, 1983. [read post]
22 Mar 2013, 1:12 pm
Doe v. [read post]
13 Oct 2017, 9:44 am
The defendant filed a motion to exclude, which the court granted. [read post]
20 Feb 2015, 7:06 pm
What does this mean for defendants? [read post]
20 Feb 2015, 7:06 pm
What does this mean for defendants? [read post]
4 Oct 2013, 4:00 am
A civil case may also be brought against a day care center, school, sports organization, or other entity who may have played a role in the death and / or was responsible for training and supervising the Defendant. 2. [read post]
9 Mar 2013, 2:53 pm
Generally, a sobriety checkpoint does not violate the Fourth Amendment. [read post]
2 Jun 2014, 4:05 am
In fact, there is no dispute of any kind relevant to the instant motion....Qualification for an accommodation depends on a self-certification—it does not require the government to make any determination at all. [read post]
28 Dec 2021, 9:52 am
Applying canons of statutory construction, the Court found that §4B1.2(b)'s definition of controlled substance offense was not ambiguous and, therefore, the plain text reading of the definition, which does not include inchoate offenses, controlled. [read post]
15 Nov 2014, 4:26 pm
The defendants argued that plaintiff’s claim ran aground on the second factor. [read post]
13 Jul 2014, 5:00 pm
Chychula, July 2, 2014, United States Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit [read post]
24 Aug 2014, 3:04 pm
(2) While the rules of evidence do not apply at sentencing, information used as a basis for sentencing under the guidelines must meet the “sufficient indicia of reliability standard. [read post]
27 Mar 2015, 1:27 pm
But subsection (1) does require an intent to defraud by its very terms. [read post]
24 Oct 2013, 4:36 pm
The unauthorized use statute applies where a defendant takes a car for a "joyride” that is, where the defendant takes or uses a car, however briefly, knowing that he does not have the consent of the car's owner. [read post]
25 Oct 2014, 4:14 pm
Further, under CPL 100.40, a misdemeanor information is facially sufficient if the non hearsay facts stated in said information establish two things: (1) each and every element of the offense charged, and (2) the defendant's commission of said crime. [read post]
25 Oct 2014, 4:14 pm
Further, under CPL 100.40, a misdemeanor information is facially sufficient if the non hearsay facts stated in said information establish two things: (1) each and every element of the offense charged, and (2) the defendant's commission of said crime. [read post]
25 Sep 2013, 6:30 am
The court found that the prohibition on the defendant from entering "into any relationship" with a bank was ambiguous and ill-defined. [read post]
8 Aug 2013, 11:27 am
Because the alleged victim does not have to have sustained any injury in connection with the ADW charge, it is easy to be falsely accused of and arrested for this crime. [read post]
18 Sep 2014, 7:36 am
Declaratory judgment Defendant Hermans is the owner of the '964 Patent. [read post]
