Search for: "People v. Mays"
Results 581 - 600
of 39,570
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
15 Feb 2021, 4:50 am
Here is the opinion in People v. [read post]
17 May 2011, 3:56 pm
In honor of the anniversary of Brown v. [read post]
15 Oct 2010, 7:02 pm
In People v Syville (_NY3d_, 2010 NY Slip Op 07249 [10/14/10])the Court of Appeals held that "[w]here an attorney has failed to comply with a timely request for the filing of a notice of appeal and the defendant alleges that the omission could not reasonably have been discovered within the one-year period, the time limit imposed in CPL 460.30 should not categorically bar an appellate court from considering that defendant's application to pursue an untimely appeal. [read post]
15 May 2008, 8:12 am
In Warner v. [read post]
11 Dec 2009, 10:09 am
But some people. [read post]
17 Jun 2011, 2:11 am
On June 14, 2011, the Michigan Supreme Court decided People v Peltola, No. 140524. [read post]
20 Mar 2018, 12:51 pm
Hill v. [read post]
26 May 2010, 2:46 pm
The Michigan Supreme Court vacated the order of the Court of Appeals in People v Tate, No. [read post]
11 Sep 2007, 11:29 am
But I think that the underlying merits of a dispute often matter more than people may think. [read post]
20 Jun 2014, 12:45 pm
By: Farrah Rajan Justice Minister Peter Mackay claims that women are not applying to be judges because it may take them away from time with their children. [read post]
15 Mar 2016, 9:34 pm
The case before the Supreme Court this term is Nebraska and Oklahoma v. [read post]
14 Oct 2009, 12:12 pm
Findlaw has just posted a column I wrote on Alvarez v. [read post]
7 Sep 2012, 2:28 pm
Co. v. [read post]
21 Aug 2020, 2:40 pm
The trial court held a contested hearing on the petition on May 3, 2018 and found that Contreraz violated his probation. [read post]
31 Dec 2024, 7:51 pm
May your 2025 be even better than 2024. [read post]
28 Aug 2014, 9:15 am
He says that "[w]hile an argument may prove unmeritorious, that is for the court ultimately to determine," not counsel, and that's the heart of things. [read post]
12 Aug 2015, 2:14 pm
"You can read the entire opinion for which $100/$300 fines were permissible, which were required, and which were impermissible.Just remember that this whole thing is about fines that (1) may never in fact be paid -- or at least not paid with a real check (the defendant was repeatedly convicted of forgery); and (2) in any event are far smaller than the costs of prosecuting and resolving this appeal. [read post]
19 Mar 2014, 4:08 pm
He pleads no context to a plethora of charges, some of which were alleged to have occurred prior to October 1, 2011, some of which were alleged to have occurred thereafter, and some of which may have occurred in either of these categories.This matters. [read post]
24 Jan 2022, 10:00 am
It may just mean that it was somewhat in abeyance at the time …. [read post]
13 Nov 2014, 12:11 pm
" What we do with the witness is another issue; he doesn't have a privilege claim, so we may well be holding him in contempt. [read post]
