Search for: "People v. Marsh" Results 61 - 80 of 188
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
22 May 2015, 12:26 pm
For example, in Marsh v Smyth, this Court reversed a motion court's Frye ruling. [read post]
22 Mar 2014, 1:40 pm by Alfred Brophy
 I start with the years leading into the Act and how the Supreme Court was moving towards an expansive understanding of the state action doctrine (obviously Marsh v. [read post]
12 Oct 2007, 4:33 am
Marsh), Judge Saylor wrote: Yet the process is nonetheless deeply troubling. [read post]
23 Apr 2014, 10:14 am by SHG
The name of the case is Paroline v. [read post]
27 Jul 2020, 10:00 am by Adriel I. Cepeda Derieux
This bolsters the constitutionality of the House bill, because, as the Supreme Court said in Marsh v. [read post]
21 Jun 2019, 12:19 pm by Travis Weber
” Later, Section II-D, which Kagan also refused to join, clearly laid out a historical test for this type of establishment clause case, building on Marsh v. [read post]
In particular, we argued that unlike prayers used to open legislative sessions at the state legislative level (one of which was upheld by the Supreme Court, largely on the basis of unbroken historical tradition, in Marsh v. [read post]
30 Jul 2018, 7:47 am by Frank Ravitch
This overview shows that Kavanaugh is a thoughtful jurist when it comes to law and religion matters, although a significant number of people might disagree with some of his analysis. [read post]
12 Aug 2011, 7:41 am by Russell Beck
In June 2011, the Texas Supreme Court issued a decision (Marsh v. [read post]
13 May 2007, 4:52 pm
Id. at 45.As noted by Justice Souter in his dissenting opinion in Kansas v. [read post]
20 Nov 2008, 12:42 am
  I take a bit of an issue with the history provided by the Court in Marsh v. [read post]
8 Dec 2023, 10:52 am by Ben Sperry
The paradigmatic example is a company town, as in the case of Marsh v. [read post]
15 May 2010, 3:23 am by SHG
However, the scope, duration and intensity of a seizure, and any subsequent search, “remain subject to the strictures of article I, §12, and judicial review” (People v Troiano, 35 NY2d 476 [1974]; People v Marsh, 20 NY2d 98 [1967]). [read post]