Search for: "People v. Wells"
Results 581 - 600
of 26,919
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
7 Apr 2008, 2:03 pm
But I wanted to make a couple of additional points as well. [read post]
6 Aug 2009, 9:39 am
And yet we spend time, effort and money -- on both the Attorney General's side as well as on the public defender's side and in the Court of Appeal -- to litigate and attempt to defend this clearly invalid provision.Confessing error is a good thing -- indeed, often a very good thing -- on occasion. [read post]
10 Apr 2009, 9:28 am
. - I tend to think that I'm reasonably well-informed as to various legal -- and non-legal -- terms. [read post]
2 Aug 2012, 11:55 am
. - I agree with Justice Liu that the trial court's attempt to "create levity" in this capital case was not exactly well-conceived. [read post]
5 May 2010, 11:35 pm
Here, it's reasonable to assume that there's something fishy going on, and that M.D. might well be in trouble. [read post]
24 Feb 2009, 10:06 am
Plus, assuming good behavior, the guy who actually committed the murder may well be out by then, since he got 25 to life as part of his plea deal. [read post]
17 May 2007, 12:51 pm
For the parents of the victims as well. [read post]
13 Oct 2009, 12:47 pm
But I didn't know until today that another way you can get yourself shot is by wearing your hair the wrong way; for example, here, "in a style favored by [Vasquez's rival gang] as well as by his own. [read post]
3 Jun 2009, 11:48 am
So now Ebaniz gets a new trial on those as well.Sometimes, when you're a DA, you've gotta leave well enough alone. [read post]
7 Dec 2009, 1:50 pm
It may well be that there was no error here and hence the California Supremes would have unanimously affirmed in any event. [read post]
17 Jul 2009, 11:04 am
(Though a curative instruction on this point to the jury seems appropriate as well.) [read post]
6 May 2008, 12:57 pm
It's well-reasoned. [read post]
26 Feb 2007, 10:57 pm
You may well be making a big, big, big mistake.Don't believe me? [read post]
25 Jul 2007, 12:49 pm
So says U.S. v. [read post]
15 Dec 2020, 4:26 am
Or perhaps Box v. [read post]
10 May 2018, 10:31 am
“How would each of you have decided Loving v. [read post]
2 May 2019, 3:10 pm
Heather’s Legal Summaries: R v Trinchi, 2019 ONCA 356 R v Trinchi is the most recent Ontario Court of Appeal decision in a string of cases related to the offence of voyeurism under s. 162(1) of the Criminal Code (see our previous post on the Supreme Court of Canada’s decision in R v Jarvis). [read post]
5 Oct 2016, 1:04 pm
"Well, that's not good. [read post]
6 Oct 2014, 2:58 pm
Which is why even trained lawyers like the prosecutor and defense counsel disagree on what it says.But the trial judge simply reads the instruction to the jurors and lets these legally untrained folk figure out for themselves what even two lawyers and a judge couldn't resolve.At which point the Court of Appeal typically says: "Well, we presume the jury followed the properly given instructions. [read post]
4 Dec 2013, 2:37 pm
Well, that seems obviously correct, right? [read post]
