Search for: "Freed v. State" Results 521 - 540 of 726
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
3 Jan 2010, 7:54 pm by Timothy P. Flynn
  The trial court stated that it would not force a 17-year to participate in parenting time when she stated that she did not want to see her Father. [read post]
3 Jan 2010, 7:36 pm by Timothy P. Flynn, Esq.
  The trial court stated that it would not force a 17-year to participate in parenting time when she stated that she did not want to see her Father. [read post]
26 Mar 2008, 1:30 pm by administrator
[ii] See the National Registry of Exonerations to read about people who were eventually freed after being wrongly convicted of crimes. [read post]
7 Apr 2023, 9:27 am by Eugene Volokh
New York State Rifle & Pistol Association v. [read post]
29 Aug 2022, 5:00 am by The Petrie-Flom Center Staff
However, while young people in the foster care in most states can rely on state constitutional right to education to bolster their right to the COVID-19 vaccine,[15] youth in the juvenile justice system in certain states have less accessibility to a right to education. [read post]
3 Jun 2023, 3:36 am by SHG
” The majority in Plessy v. [read post]
2 Jan 2012, 4:00 am by Terry Hart
” Copyright Promotes Knowledge The copyright statutes passed in the States prior to the drafting of the Constitution use similar language. [read post]
25 Aug 2010, 8:26 pm by Steve Hall
"The responsibility of the state to provide exculpatory evidence to the defense was articulated in the 1963 Supreme Court ruling in Brady v. [read post]
27 Jun 2024, 6:30 am by Guest Blogger
”[1] Thus, for example, Graber showed, among his many other myth-busting insights, that Marbury v. [read post]
19 Feb 2018, 7:56 pm
  He dreamed of the emergence of the “stateless, footloose MNE” (Ibid., 789), a transnational entity, freed of the regulatory peculiarities of any one state and beyond the contradictions of home-host state divides (Ibid., 787-789). [read post]
3 Nov 2008, 3:51 am
 Fourth, the Court determined that, because the Appellate Division’s opinion in State v. [read post]