Search for: "CRIM" Results 861 - 880 of 4,178
Sort by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
12 Sep 2016, 6:01 am
This post examines a recentopinion from the Court of Appeals of Texas – Houston:  Bryant v. [read post]
7 Sep 2016, 12:03 pm by John Rubin
See also North Carolina Pattern Jury Instruction—Crim. 206.10 at p. 2 n.4 (June 2014). [read post]
7 Sep 2016, 12:03 pm by John Rubin
See also North Carolina Pattern Jury Instruction—Crim. 206.10 at p. 2 n.4 (June 2014). [read post]
7 Sep 2016, 3:50 am by SHG
Somebody on air actually knew what they were talking about when it came to crim law. [read post]
On 18 February 2016, the Supreme Court handed down its much awaited judgment in the appeal of R v Jogee [2013] EWCA Crim 1433, which was consolidated with the Privy Council appeal of Ruddock v The Queen JCPC 2015/0020. [read post]
16 Aug 2016, 7:27 am by Adam Craggs, Partner, RPC
Applying the principles of R v Del Basso and Goodwin [2010] EWCA Crim 1119 and R v Waya [2012] UKSC 51, the Court of Appeal concluded that it would be wrong in principle and repugnant to carry out an accounting exercise in respect of those monies. [read post]
9 Aug 2016, 1:07 pm by Jon Sands
  Fed R Crim P 35(b) allows a sentence reduction. [read post]
9 Aug 2016, 6:29 am by SHG
Put aside, for the moment, that her hatred is consistent with the social justice flavor du jour, and consider the situation if she was a “sovereign citizen,” who was teaching her students in her crim law class that judges in courtroom with fringed flags had only maritime jurisdiction. [read post]
8 Aug 2016, 3:32 pm by Sabrina I. Pacifici
” See the report at: http://trac.syr.edu/tracreports/crim/431/ [read post]
27 Jul 2016, 6:28 am
., supra.The court began its analysis of the issues in the case by explaining thatAppellant argues that the juvenile court committed legal error in ordering restitution to `make the victim whole,’ rather than to rehabilitate him, and by improperly awarding the amount of the original purchase price, rather than the depreciated replacement value of the device, which was no longer new and had been technologically superceded by the iPhone 5.We agree with the State that the juvenile court did not… [read post]