Search for: "State v. Peacock"
Results 41 - 60
of 67
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
27 Jun 2023, 1:55 am
Counsel for SSE were Jonathan Peacock KC and Michael Ripley. [read post]
18 Jan 2012, 1:40 am
R v Peacock: Michael Peacock was charged under the Obscene Publications Act 1959. [read post]
6 Aug 2008, 7:54 pm
Supreme Court, in Atkins v. [read post]
8 Mar 2018, 9:30 pm
Supreme Court case, Lucia v. [read post]
30 Mar 2010, 6:15 am
Inc. v. [read post]
26 Jun 2013, 3:30 am
§ 3162(a)(2); United States v. [read post]
8 Jan 2012, 4:25 pm
Terry, No. 150012/2012, Supreme Court of the State of New York County of New York. [read post]
29 Aug 2014, 6:29 am
State v. [read post]
16 Feb 2010, 9:35 am
An extended excerpt:Freddie Peacock of Rochester, New York, was convicted of rape in 1976. [read post]
21 Mar 2022, 1:58 pm
State Farm Mut. [read post]
6 Oct 2022, 7:30 am
State v. [read post]
15 Jan 2012, 4:06 pm
On the Centre for Law, Justice and Journalism blog, Alex Antoniou analyses the recent decision in R v Peacock. [read post]
25 Apr 2009, 3:21 am
Peacock, for example, has called it a “draconian” measure that has “effectively put states into ‘administrative receivership,’ undermining principles of federalism at their most fundamental level. [read post]
20 Oct 2023, 12:30 pm
" The case, Jarkesy v. [read post]
7 Jan 2012, 4:16 pm
This week also brought ‘Fisting’ to the fore on twitter: Obscenity trial – the law is not suitable for a digital age Myles Jackman in the Guardian: “I welcome the jury’s verdict but the OPA means the state is still capable of acting as a voyeur in the bedroom” I need not trouble you with the facts of R v Peacock. [read post]
1 Mar 2016, 4:56 am
Proud as peacocks, they are. [read post]
28 May 2015, 6:00 am
With its concrete facade, it has been likened to a peacock or called “Fort Book” and has been praised or derided as brutalist architecture. [read post]
22 May 2024, 9:52 am
As demonstrated in Woods Peacock Engineering Consultants, Inc., SBA No. [read post]
3 Dec 2011, 9:56 am
Supreme Court decision in Stern v. [read post]
12 Oct 2021, 10:00 am
Stigler assumes the underlying goods are neither substitutes nor complements: Stigler, George J. (1963) “United States v. [read post]
