Search for: "Hawkins v. Hawkins"
Results 561 - 580
of 766
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
30 Oct 2009, 5:49 pm
The California Supreme Court denied a petition for review and depublication of the Second District's decision in Palmer/Sixth Street Properties v. [read post]
29 Oct 2009, 10:58 am
This aspect of Palmer, particularly if read in combination with the BIACC v. [read post]
20 Oct 2009, 2:19 pm
To Judge Clifton -- an eminently reasonable fellow -- as well as Judges Hawkins and Berzon, both of whom share Judge Clifton's keen (and important) understanding of the way the world actually works. [read post]
19 Oct 2009, 1:44 pm
Hazelton, Douglas V. [read post]
13 Oct 2009, 8:48 pm
In today’s case (Gulamani v. [read post]
2 Oct 2009, 11:21 am
Jones had a very good draw (good for him, anyway, and bad for the Arizona Attorney General) and got three Democratic appointees: one from Carter (Betty Fletcher) and two from Clinton (Hawkins and Thomas). [read post]
2 Oct 2009, 8:35 am
Fletcher and Hawkins) finds IAC in the sentencing phase of this capital prosecution for two murders. [read post]
20 Sep 2009, 1:17 pm
United States v. [read post]
17 Sep 2009, 8:51 am
U.S. v. [read post]
15 Sep 2009, 4:57 am
U.S. v. [read post]
9 Sep 2009, 11:21 am
Bauer, Jason Hawkins, Charles L. [read post]
8 Sep 2009, 12:00 pm
The first is authored by cross-town friend and UH law prof Jim Hawkins (pictured) and is titled "Doctors as Bankers: Evidence from Fertility Markets. [read post]
7 Sep 2009, 12:57 pm
One which I blogged about over a year ago, Hawkins v. [read post]
6 Sep 2009, 6:53 am
But since "CPL 470.15(2)(a) authorizes an appellate court to modify a judgment by reducing a conviction to a lesser included offense if it determines the evidence is insufficient to support a conviction for the greater offense but sufficient to establish defendant's guilt of the lesser " (People v Hawkins, 99 NY2d 592 [2003]) and the prerequisite for doing that is preservation of the issue by an appropriate motion for a trial order of dismissal why is a claim of… [read post]
30 Aug 2009, 12:58 am
The case is Ray v. [read post]
23 Aug 2009, 7:35 am
When motion to dismiss is not sufficiently specific there is not a preserved issue of law before the appellate court (See People v Hawkins, 11 NY3d 484 [2008](discussed here).One would think that fourteen years later defense attorneys would be familiar with and comply with the requirement that there be a specific motion for a trial order of dismissal. [read post]
18 Aug 2009, 12:53 pm
., v. [read post]
