Search for: "State v. Muniz"
Results 41 - 60
of 88
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
5 Aug 2011, 3:21 am
That was the question the 6th Circuit wrestled with in their decision last week in Muniz v. [read post]
23 Jun 2009, 4:20 am
This exception was recognized by the United States Supreme Court in Pennsylvania v. [read post]
21 Oct 2011, 5:00 am
The district court certified that its decision is in direct conflict with the decision of the Second District Court of Appeal in Muniz v. [read post]
2 Aug 2010, 4:00 am
Wells, Regulating Offensiveness: Snyder v. [read post]
8 Sep 2023, 3:15 pm
Gainesville Women Care, LLC v. [read post]
18 Dec 2009, 11:29 am
" (link to full Statesman-Journal article) 2) Read the September 30, 2009, State v. [read post]
6 Jul 2018, 12:15 pm
Tamplin v. [read post]
17 Dec 2010, 3:30 am
Aug. 8, 2007); and in Muniz v. [read post]
14 Mar 2016, 4:22 am
See, e.g., Muniz v. [read post]
14 Mar 2016, 4:22 am
See, e.g., Muniz v. [read post]
14 Jan 2025, 6:14 am
The court cited Muniz v. [read post]
29 Sep 2009, 4:12 am
State v. [read post]
14 Dec 2015, 4:00 am
, (December 8, 2015).From elsewhere:Samuel V. [read post]
24 Aug 2011, 8:58 am
(See Swarthout v. [read post]
24 Apr 2012, 8:51 am
— Muniz v. [read post]
17 Jul 2015, 5:01 am
Finally, the Tax Court upheld the imposition of a section 6662 accuracy-related penalty, pointing out, among other things, that the taxpayer had been advised to seek a tax professional’s opinion but that she did not introduce any evidence that she relied on professional tax advice.In the other case, Muniz v. [read post]
23 Sep 2009, 5:37 am
United States v. [read post]
17 Oct 2017, 8:38 am
In 2012’s State v. [read post]
15 May 2013, 9:56 am
Washington, 466 U.S. 668 (1984), finds no ineffectiveness by defense attorneys who fall asleep during the cross-examination of their client (Muniz v. [read post]
