Search for: "State v. True"
Results 5861 - 5880
of 21,858
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
10 Feb 2010, 3:17 pm
Given what the doctrine says -- both the categorical approach as well as the expansive state law doctrine of indecent exposure -- why didn't the government introduce evidence that satisfied the modified approach and proved that Nunez was convicted (as I'm sure he was) of a true moral turpitude offense rather than due to his appearance on "Boys Gone Wild" or on one side of a glory hole?! [read post]
8 Jun 2010, 12:06 pm
During jury selection, after the trial judge told prospective jurors the nature of the charges and said that defendant was representing himself, defendant objected and stated he took offense to that term and stated he was "going to 'defend' myself, not 'represent myself,' sir. [read post]
23 Sep 2013, 5:52 pm
Prods., Inc. v. [read post]
5 Dec 2009, 9:01 am
From Prashad v. [read post]
6 Jul 2007, 4:29 am
The rule is legal recognition of something that is as true today as ever: prescription medical products are not available to the public at large precisely because the FDA has determined that such products have inherent, unavoidable risks of sufficient gravity to require a doctor's evaluation before anyone can use them. [read post]
6 Dec 2022, 4:51 pm
In one of them, LKQ asked the court to rule that the current primary reference requirement for design patent obviousness, as stated in In re Rosen and Durling v. [read post]
13 Dec 2017, 7:21 am
He filed an amicus brief supporting the cert petition in NIFLA v. [read post]
9 Aug 2012, 11:03 pm
As in Doe v. [read post]
19 Jul 2012, 2:05 pm
We recently rejected a similar argument in People v. [read post]
11 Apr 2025, 6:01 am
This is true for several reasons. [read post]
28 May 2006, 10:11 pm
Were that true, the practice would be exempt from US patent laws. [read post]
6 Aug 2012, 3:00 am
** See Sheeran v New York State Dept. of Transp. [read post]
16 Nov 2011, 5:12 am
” United States v. [read post]
1 Dec 2022, 8:37 am
But it’s true that anecdotal evidence of content moderation bias is junk pseudo-science that has no place in a courtroom.] [read post]
14 Nov 2018, 5:38 am
In the reported decision of P.H. v. [read post]
4 Dec 2018, 10:29 pm
United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit. [read post]
23 Jul 2012, 9:33 pm
SWAMMI, INC. v. [read post]
11 Sep 2015, 8:35 am
This is especially true in Section 230 jurisprudence, where one of Section 230’s signature benefits is to reduce defense costs (reducing “duck bites” as Judge Kozinski described it in Roommates.com). [read post]
29 Sep 2015, 7:25 am
And that assertion could be true. [read post]
27 May 2008, 11:43 am
Supreme Court decision in Davis v. [read post]
