Search for: "People v David S." Results 4941 - 4960 of 5,862
Sort by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
25 Feb 2010, 10:57 am by admin
The Agency’s response to any comments received will be available for public inspection at the U.S. [read post]
25 Feb 2010, 7:57 am by Steve Hall
Supreme Court rulings on flawed jury instructions used prior to 1991.The 5-4 decision did not affect Hood's 1990 conviction in the shooting death of two people in Plano. [read post]
24 Feb 2010, 2:15 pm by ALeonard
Although the state’s marriage statute does not permit same-sex couples to marry in Maryland, and that statute was upheld in a narrow 5-4 vote by the state’s highest court in 2007 in Conaway v. [read post]
17 Feb 2010, 8:34 am by Hull & Hull LLP
  Sharon Davis:   And certainly that was the case in the Fiaco v. [read post]
15 Feb 2010, 6:06 am by Timothy P. Flynn, Esq.
 The appellant-defendant in the case is represented by the Michigan Innocence Project, run out of the UM Law School by Professor David Moran.The case, People vs Likine, was the subject of a one-day jury trial in the Oakland County Circuit Court back in November 2008. [read post]
15 Feb 2010, 6:02 am by Timothy P. Flynn, Esq.
 The appellant-defendant in the case is represented by the Michigan Innocence Project, run out of the UM Law School by Professor David Moran.The case, People vs Likine, was the subject of a one-day jury trial in the Oakland County Circuit Court back in November 2008. [read post]
15 Feb 2010, 5:45 am by Timothy P. Flynn
 The defendant-appellant in the case is represented by the Michigan Innocence Project, run out of the UM Law School by Professor David Moran.The case, People vs Likine, was the subject of a one-day jury trial in the Oakland County Circuit Court back in November 2008. [read post]
14 Feb 2010, 8:58 am by jailhouselawyer
This government that has locked up more people than any in UK history has the temerity to claim moral authority, whilst acting in bad faith in defiance of implementing the Court’s judgment. [read post]
11 Feb 2010, 1:30 pm by Chris Jaglowitz
A Building Component does not become Common Area just because it was placed or built on the Common Area -- California HOA attorney David Swedelson blogs on a recent appellate case that sounds strikingly similar to our Court of Appeal’s ruling in Wentworth Condo Corp. 198 v. [read post]