Search for: "State v. Atkins"
Results 541 - 560
of 646
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
17 Oct 2024, 12:51 pm
Smith v. [read post]
13 Aug 2007, 6:56 am
In 2004, the Supreme Court ruled in Atkins v. [read post]
15 Jun 2009, 4:00 am
Atkins, 42 AD2d 799, 840 NYS2d 217 (3d Dept 2007). [read post]
12 Oct 2009, 5:58 am
Gear, Inc. v. [read post]
7 Nov 2018, 8:46 am
In Hurst v. [read post]
27 May 2016, 8:00 am
State Farm Fire and Casualty Co. v. [read post]
21 Nov 2018, 9:56 am
State Bar of California and Lathrop v. [read post]
13 Jun 2022, 11:37 am
Korematsu v. the United States : World War II Japanese-American internment camps. [read post]
8 May 2011, 7:01 pm
” United States v. [read post]
6 Jul 2009, 8:24 am
Supreme Court has already ruled the death penalty unconstitutional in cases involving defendants with mental retardation (Atkins v. [read post]
24 May 2012, 2:14 pm
UPDATE EVEN: Mike Atkins has more. [read post]
28 Oct 2010, 9:19 am
Does Judge Atkins see the case the same way? [read post]
28 Oct 2010, 9:19 am
Does Judge Atkins see the case the same way? [read post]
28 Feb 2024, 10:00 pm
On Wednesday, the Supreme Court heard oral argument in Garland v. [read post]
21 Sep 2021, 2:35 pm
(See Narstedt v. [read post]
6 Nov 2023, 1:11 am
On 1 and 2 November 2023, the UK Supreme court (Lords Reed, Sales, Hamblen, Burrows and Richards) heard the appeal in the case of Mueen-Uddin v Secretary of State for the Home Department. [read post]
14 Oct 2021, 11:08 am
§ 3596(c) and Atkins v. [read post]
4 Dec 2011, 4:04 pm
Levy v. [read post]
17 Jul 2023, 4:15 am
But was Dobbs more significant than the Court's 2002 decision in Atkins v. [read post]
3 Mar 2008, 12:13 pm
Grant of habeas relief vacating petitioner's sentence of death, and ordering that he be resentenced to receive a sentence other than death, is affirmed where the Double Jeopardy Clause bars respondent-warden's claim that, even though petitioner was found to be mentally retarded on direct appeal, Ohio should be permitted to relitigate the finding now that it has taken on new legal significance in light of Atkins v. [read post]
