Search for: "State v. B. V."
Results 701 - 720
of 41,713
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
12 Dec 2023, 5:56 am
In United States v. [read post]
3 Mar 2014, 11:15 am
Key Statute and Precedent State v. [read post]
20 Mar 2024, 2:04 pm
D.L. v. [read post]
16 Dec 2010, 7:21 am
This is Part V, the final installment, in a series discussing the holding in Reliable Fire Equipment v. [read post]
22 Apr 2011, 12:50 pm
§ 7607(b)(1).When the Mass Court went through the various standing requirements, it had already established that the requirements for causation and redressability were relaxed for the state petitioners. [read post]
19 Aug 2010, 1:08 pm
On June 24, 2010, the Supreme Court announced its decision in Morrison v. [read post]
29 Jan 2009, 8:15 am
This judgment, in many respects, follows the earlier decision of Haines v Sarner [2005] EWHC 90009 (Costs), in which Simon Gibbs acted for the Defendant. [read post]
20 May 2016, 1:59 pm
.), § 6-205(b) of the Criminal Law Article ... [read post]
1 Feb 2011, 10:50 am
§ 943.20(1)(b). [read post]
29 May 2020, 8:02 am
Criminal procedure — Illegal sentence — Consecutive sentence A jury sitting in the Circuit Court for Anne Arundel County convicted Arthur Antonio Wiggins, the appellant, of a violation of § 3-602(b)(1) of the Criminal Law Article (2012 Repl.), which makes it a felony for a “parent or other person who has permanent or temporary care ... [read post]
5 Jul 2019, 9:34 am
In 2018, he filed a “Motion To Declare Guilty Plea Void And Of No Effect,” citing the court’s revisory power under Maryland Rule 4-331(b). [read post]
17 May 2013, 8:00 am
Harris v. [read post]
30 Jan 2017, 6:23 am
State v. [read post]
21 Aug 2013, 2:30 pm
Cheek v. [read post]
7 Mar 2013, 2:20 am
In both Ortiz v. [read post]
12 Feb 2011, 5:31 am
In its opinion in Luce v. [read post]
13 Feb 2013, 8:43 am
It’s interesting that the United States hasn’t relied on the Elections Clause in its defense of Sections 4(b) and 5. [read post]
13 Sep 2022, 2:11 pm
” §§ 1396a(a)(25)(A)–(B). [read post]
14 Aug 2019, 7:12 am
B. [read post]
9 Jul 2009, 9:24 am
Selecky, the Ninth Circuit has found that the First Amendment's Free Exercise Clause does not require that pharmacists with a religious objection to the Plan B contraceptive be exempted from the state... [read post]
