Search for: "People v. Mays"
Results 841 - 860
of 40,059
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
25 Jan 2012, 1:34 am
On 17 to 19 January 2012, the Supreme Court heard an appeal in the case of Homer v Chief Constable of West Yorkshire Police and Seldon v Clarkson Wright and Jakes . [read post]
12 Sep 2008, 9:01 am
The issues presented by L.T.H. v. [read post]
1 Jun 2023, 11:43 am
(relisted after the May 25 conference) Waleski v. [read post]
4 Oct 2018, 1:34 pm
” In People v. [read post]
28 Jul 2009, 12:53 pm
Lindor's legal defense in UMG v. [read post]
20 Mar 2012, 6:55 pm
Although you may feel that this does not apply to you, the court in Rippy v. [read post]
25 Aug 2016, 10:36 am
I think this line from today's opinion by Judge Kleinfeld is even funnier when read in isolation.He's describing the "normal" liberties that "regular" people have (as opposed to, say, people on probation). [read post]
23 Sep 2020, 6:29 am
Kraft and State v. [read post]
23 Aug 2013, 3:51 pm
An experience which may or may not be entirely fun, but is certainly a lot -- lot -- better than prison.Doesn't make much sense.We also might want to compare the Appellate Division's ruling here to other forfeiture cases. [read post]
24 May 2008, 8:13 am
State v. [read post]
9 Feb 2018, 8:37 pm
When Ed Blum brought Evenwel v. [read post]
9 Feb 2018, 8:37 pm
When Ed Blum brought Evenwel v. [read post]
13 Sep 2011, 10:15 am
People v. [read post]
24 Mar 2014, 11:51 am
As I read that portion of the Court of Appeal's opinion, I simultaneously thought (1) that that reasoning had some persuasive merit, but (2) that it was nonetheless a little weird to be quoting from a dissent, which only highlights the fact that the current opinion -- which goes even further than that earlier case -- may perhaps be somewhat "pressing the envelope".Though I think I understood the opinion's discussion of Justice Benke's dissent a little better once I got to the very end… [read post]
27 Mar 2014, 1:04 pm
(Though, to be honest, I think that Justice Liu may be expressing a hope rather than giving a neutral evaluation of the majority's holding. [read post]
2 Dec 2014, 5:02 pm
("Defendant missed a CONREP appointment in May 2009. [read post]
6 Oct 2014, 2:58 pm
They may not be sure of exactly what the law is or whether the misstatement was prejudicial. [read post]
30 Aug 2022, 8:06 am
And I can only hope -- and it's a hope, not a certainty -- that it's not for hurting someone.But, yep, I get it; the statute requires a particular type of evidence, and there wasn't pretty much any type of relevant evidence admitted at his trial.Which may perhaps dictate the result, but doesn't alleviate my concern.Second, the Court of Appeal also holds that Mr. [read post]
26 Jul 2010, 5:00 am
See McDonald v. [read post]
