Search for: "United States v. May" Results 8661 - 8680 of 47,751
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
29 Jun 2007, 1:25 pm
Justice Mihara dissents.The majority opinion contains the following opening paragraph:"The sole issue in this appeal is whether "the role of the jury [is] diminished and eroded in violation of the Sixth and Fourteenth Amendments to the United States Constitution" by the use of juvenile adjudications to increase the maximum punishment for an offense, in light of the United States Supreme Court's opinions in Apprendi v. [read post]
26 May 2021, 10:31 am by Tyler Loga
The United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit in Owensby & Kritikos, Incorporated, et al. v. [read post]
15 May 2023, 12:56 pm by Jeff Welty
The Fourth Circuit considered the intersection of open carry and Terry in United States v. [read post]
31 Jan 2010, 5:09 am by Federal and Extradition Defense
Likewise, a mere tip from United States agents to foreign authorities is not enough.The following factors are important in this analysis:(1) whether the United States agents instigated or helped plan the search;(2) the degree of cooperation between foreign officials and United States agents in the investigation;(3) the degree of participation by United States agents in the search;(4) evidence that United States… [read post]
6 Sep 2007, 6:21 pm
" It pointed out that the tradition in the United States has been for works to be created, copyrighted and then revert to the public domain. [read post]
1 Oct 2008, 6:44 am
In United States v. 4.85 Acres of Land, No. 07-35310 (Sep. 29, 2008), the US Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit held that the trial court should not have refused to admit evidence of sales at properties nearby the property taken, even though the sales occurred after the taking. [read post]
4 May 2007, 2:29 pm
The Net Neutrality Debate: Twenty Five Years After United States v. [read post]
10 Jun 2008, 2:35 pm
Yesterday, the United States Supreme Court held that the "class-of-one" theory of Equal Protection does not apply in the public employment context. [read post]