Search for: "People v May"
Results 641 - 660
of 44,070
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
13 Apr 2011, 1:12 pm
I may have the wrong person. [read post]
8 Jun 2009, 11:15 am
It should not surprise anyone that in People v Durand (2009 NY Slip Op 04476 4th Dept 6/5/09) the Court held that under New York law it was error for the lower court to have considered "the counts of burglary in the third degree and petit larceny, of which defendant was acquitted, when imposing the sentences on the criminal trespass counts (see People v Reeder, 298 AD2d 468, lv denied 99 NY2d 538; see also People v Rogers, 56 AD3d 1173,… [read post]
29 Jan 2016, 9:00 am
This was the issue in Burgueno v. [read post]
18 Jul 2016, 8:30 am
Furthermore, shutting down a communicate-by-text option may circumscribe information flows in ways we can’t anticipate or understand. [read post]
11 Jan 2012, 10:17 am
Similar dynamics may well apply in criminal cases, thereby supporting a similar rule.But, at the same time, the criminal caseload is crushingly burdensome. [read post]
1 Apr 2010, 7:47 pm
A reminder: In 1986 the Court of Appeals held that a party seeking a missing witness instruction has the burden of making the request "as soon as practicable" (People v Gonzalez, 68 NY2d 424, 428 [1986]). [read post]
5 Jun 2012, 7:03 am
As Bushnell v. [read post]
27 Apr 2011, 2:37 pm
Or, as in this case, for serving such people? [read post]
8 May 2024, 2:00 pm
Some people really like their guns, and some people really don't like any government involvement with them at all. [read post]
11 May 2008, 4:32 pm
Blogger's note: Loving v. [read post]
21 Mar 2021, 12:10 pm
People v. [read post]
26 Jul 2022, 6:12 pm
THE PEOPLE, Plaintiff and Respondent, v. [read post]
24 Jul 2014, 11:31 am
His IQ may well be below 70. [read post]
30 Jun 2015, 2:02 pm
But by then, it may be too late to gain any benefit from a sentencing reduction because they already will have served the time in question. [read post]
24 Aug 2015, 2:13 pm
"Nolan Pamintuan was engaged to marry Rowena Panelo on May 18, 1996. [read post]
16 Oct 2020, 1:19 pm
Personally, I think Justice Slough may be right that this might have been a relatively tiny "detail" about which the jury may not have cared (or that the victim was simply "clarifying" at trial). [read post]
23 May 2014, 11:44 am
The Justices may have their problems, but soon Ryan v. [read post]
24 Feb 2015, 4:07 pm
In State v. [read post]
2 Jul 2008, 5:07 am
United States v. [read post]
