Search for: "Com. v. Davis"
Results 61 - 80
of 134
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
8 Feb 2012, 3:34 am
The court uses the primary purpose test, as developed in Davis v. [read post]
25 Jan 2012, 3:44 am
Wade, Gilbert v. [read post]
8 Jan 2012, 4:25 pm
Meanwhile, the Angry Mob blog provides some context from the newspaper archives on the Mail’s editorial line, as also covered in Nick Davies’ book, Flat Earth News. [read post]
5 Jan 2012, 3:36 am
While Crawford involved the prototypical ex parte statement — a written statement to police as a result of an interrogation at the station — later decisions, like Davis v. [read post]
3 Jan 2012, 3:28 am
In State v. [read post]
14 Dec 2011, 5:00 am
Meyer, CV 10 730994 (Ohio Com. [read post]
10 Dec 2011, 6:44 pm
& Com. [read post]
7 Dec 2011, 1:20 pm
& Com.229-249 (2011).Nowicki, Stacy A. [read post]
23 Nov 2011, 3:48 am
Harry Blackmun had his epiphany back in 1994, in Callins v. [read post]
30 Oct 2011, 5:04 am
On 19 October 2011, the Supreme Court (Lord Hope, Lord Walker, Lord Mance, Lord Clarke and Lord Wilson) released its decision in the joined cases of R (Davies & Anor) v The Commissioners for Her Majesty’s Revenue & Customs and R (Gaines-Cooper) v The Commissioners for Her Majesty’s Revenue & Customs [2011] UKSC 47. [read post]
30 Oct 2011, 5:04 am
On 19 October 2011, the Supreme Court (Lord Hope, Lord Walker, Lord Mance, Lord Clarke and Lord Wilson) released its decision in the joined cases of R (Davies & Anor) v The Commissioners for Her Majesty’s Revenue & Customs and R (Gaines-Cooper) v The Commissioners for Her Majesty’s Revenue & Customs [2011] UKSC 47. [read post]
12 Oct 2011, 3:37 am
The court backpedaled from that a bit last year in Holland v. [read post]
10 Aug 2011, 3:57 am
In Bryant, you’ll recall (and if you don’t you can read about it here), the Court expanded upon the “primary purpose” test for determining whether a statement is testimonial, which the Court had earlier established in Davis v. [read post]
3 Aug 2011, 2:25 pm
Keith Lee of An Associates Mind comes out strong: Facebook You v. [read post]
3 Aug 2011, 5:31 am
Davis v. [read post]
8 Jul 2011, 2:59 am
(And keep in mind that in Davis v. [read post]
24 Jun 2011, 3:49 am
Crawford was unanimous (although two justices concurred only in judgment), and the next decision in that line, Davis v. [read post]
15 Jun 2011, 3:43 am
The panel does an excellent job reviewing the appropriate law, especially the “primary purpose” test articulated in Davis v. [read post]
