Search for: "Standard Jury Instructions Criminal Cases"
Results 821 - 840
of 1,723
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
23 Apr 2015, 5:03 am
At least under the national criminal law standard known as the Model Penal Code that all first-year law students are taught in Criminal Law 101, a higher state of mind such as intent “always proves a lower level,” in this case, recklessness. [read post]
16 Apr 2015, 9:37 am
United States 14-534Issue: (1) Whether, in a federal criminal case in which the defendant has introduced and the trial court has admitted evidence of good character under Federal Rule of Evidence 404(a)(2)(A), the trial court should instruct the jury that character evidence alone may create a reasonable doubt; and (2) whether testimony directly supporting a criminal defendant’s theory that he lacked a motive to commit the offense with which he is… [read post]
14 Apr 2015, 10:50 am
Ct. (2015), the case arose out of a scenario in which the defendant was convicted by a jury of having purportedly misled a police officer engaged in a criminal investigation. [read post]
9 Apr 2015, 5:49 am
As the site also explains, special verdicts are not common in criminal cases involving a jury. [read post]
8 Apr 2015, 3:49 am
It would be great to see an actual criminal jury instruction where the shooting of a fleeing subject ostensibly to protect the public was used as a defense. [read post]
2 Apr 2015, 10:27 am
The parties will also discuss jury instructions, with the defense presenting its case on Monday. [read post]
1 Apr 2015, 6:05 pm
In a criminal case, the standard of proof is proof beyond a reasonable doubt. [read post]
1 Apr 2015, 6:11 am
District Court Judge who had the case gave the jury. [read post]
30 Mar 2015, 12:47 pm
The jury instruction issue was decided in favor of the accused by the Kansas Supreme Court in the Gleason case, and then applied to the Carr cases. [read post]
29 Mar 2015, 5:16 pm
But there are other realms of discretion in criminal law. [read post]
27 Mar 2015, 9:55 am
In all three cases, Kansas asks whether the Eighth Amendment requires that a capital-sentencing jury be affirmatively instructed that mitigating circumstances need not be proven beyond a reasonable doubt. [read post]
27 Mar 2015, 8:44 am
Gleason 14-452Issue: Whether the Eighth Amendment requires that a capital-sentencing jury be affirmatively instructed that mitigating circumstances “need not be proven beyond a reasonable doubt,” as the Kansas Supreme Court held in this case, or instead whether the Eighth Amendment is satisfied by instructions that, in context, make clear that each juror must individually assess and weigh any mitigating circumstances. [read post]
25 Mar 2015, 9:00 am
In particular, as noted in California Civil Jury Instruction (“CACI”) Number 200, the elements of a crime in a criminal case must be proven beyond a reasonable doubt while in a civil case the plaintiff’s burden of proof is a less-stringent “more likely true than not true” standard. [read post]
22 Mar 2015, 7:15 pm
The one exception is eyewitness identification of suspects in criminal cases where several state supreme courts have relied heavily on cognitive psychological research to craft better science- based specialized jury instructions.This article examines in detail and analyzes the often amazing and illuminating cognitive psychological research on memory and demeanor. [read post]
6 Mar 2015, 7:56 am
Thus, Innovation argued, evidence about the PTO proceedings would be contrary to the law of the case and would confuse the jury. [read post]
6 Mar 2015, 7:13 am
To determine what facts were used to prove the offense, we examine the charging information, evidence, arguments, and jury instructions. [read post]
5 Mar 2015, 2:56 pm
Elsewhere on the criminal docket, Hurst v. [read post]
27 Feb 2015, 6:15 am
Kansas, 14-6810, which asks whether a “jury view” of locations relevant to a criminal case is a critical stage of a criminal trial requiring the presence of a defendant and assistance of counsel. [read post]
18 Feb 2015, 1:30 pm
Gleason 14-452Issue: Whether the Eighth Amendment requires that a capital-sentencing jury be affirmatively instructed that mitigating circumstances “need not be proven beyond a reasonable doubt,” as the Kansas Supreme Court held in this case, or instead whether the Eighth Amendment is satisfied by instructions that, in context, make clear that each juror must individually assess and weigh any mitigating circumstances. [read post]
9 Feb 2015, 8:49 am
Platters cases: 9thCir. reverses grant of PI; M.D. [read post]
