Search for: "Perez v. United States"
Results 641 - 660
of 713
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
27 May 2008, 8:11 am
In Gomez-Perez v. [read post]
21 May 2008, 2:46 pm
Perez, 66 M.J. 164 (C.A.A.F. 2008) (per curiam), and United States v. [read post]
19 May 2008, 8:55 am
Supreme Court, May 12, 2008 Gonzales v. [read post]
17 May 2008, 3:10 pm
Perez, No. 07-10289. [read post]
16 May 2008, 1:43 pm
Although urinalysis results may often be sufficiently reliable evidence that the opportunity for crossexamination is unnecessary for due process purposes, see United States v. [read post]
15 May 2008, 10:16 am
The court referred to Perez v. [read post]
21 Apr 2008, 12:28 pm
See United States v. [read post]
10 Apr 2008, 3:42 pm
Opinion below (4th Circuit) Petition for certiorari Brief in opposition Petitioner's reply Amicus brief of the Maritime Law Association of the United States (in support of the petitioner) Amicus brief of the American Institute of Marine Underwriters (in support of the petitioner) __________________ Docket: 07-1092 Case name: Perez v. [read post]
30 Mar 2008, 7:47 am
It has decided every case it heard in November except for United States v. [read post]
18 Mar 2008, 12:10 pm
(citing United States v. [read post]
18 Mar 2008, 5:07 am
V. [read post]
12 Mar 2008, 4:30 am
We previously discussed a motion filed by my Air Force Appellate Defense Division colleague Capt Tiaundra Sorrell to move up her oral argument in United States v. [read post]
8 Mar 2008, 2:35 pm
See, e.g., United States v. [read post]
19 Feb 2008, 10:18 am
Today, the Court will hear argument in Gomez-Perez v. [read post]
17 Feb 2008, 4:00 pm
United States (06-11429) and United States v. [read post]
8 Feb 2008, 12:59 am
"
United States v. [read post]
7 Feb 2008, 9:20 am
At issue in United States v. [read post]
30 Jan 2008, 7:35 am
Bureau of Prisons, No. 06-9130 I"n a case involving the scope of 28 U.S.C. section 2680, which carves out certain exceptions to the United States' waiver of sovereign immunity for torts committed by federal employees, the Court rules that section 2680's broad phrase "any other law enforcement officer" covers all law enforcement officers, and not just law enforcement officers enforcing customs or excise laws. [read post]
20 Jan 2008, 3:00 pm
Piccadilly Cafeterias (07-312), and United States v. [read post]
18 Jan 2008, 12:32 pm
United States v. [read post]
