Search for: "State v. Sanchez-Sanchez" Results 861 - 880 of 913
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
14 Jul 2008, 5:04 pm
  In one case widely seen as destined for the Supreme Court - United States v. [read post]
13 May 2008, 1:35 pm
Cox, No. 07-1103 In an action alleging vindictive prosecution against Michigan's Attorney General, a state Supreme Court Justice, and the state's Secretary of State, as well as others in the AG's office, dismissal of plaintiffs' claims and imposition of sanctions against them are affirmed where: 1) because the issues raised in a state court were substantially the same as those raised in the district court, because those interests implicated… [read post]
27 May 2010, 6:53 am by admin
 “This deal is the deal,” said company spokeswoman Judy Sanchez. [read post]
16 Aug 2024, 3:00 am by Jim Sedor
All seven state ballot measures considered following the Supreme Court’s 2022 Dobbs v. [read post]
1 Dec 2023, 3:00 am by Jim Sedor
Yahoo News – Michael Bender and Anjali Huynh (New York Times) | Published: 11/29/2023 Since the Supreme Court overturned Roe v. [read post]
30 Nov 2009, 9:21 am
Wilner served as counsel of record to Guantanamo detainees in Rasul v. [read post]
9 Aug 2013, 2:35 pm by Stephen Bilkis
Additionally, nowhere in the record did the defendant explicitly state that he waived his right to appeal. [read post]
9 Mar 2010, 12:20 am
Chief Justice Recuses in New Wyeth Case The National Law Journal The Supreme Court on Monday announced it was granting review in Bruesewitz v. [read post]
21 Feb 2018, 7:00 am by Robert Chesney, Danielle Citron
As Julian Sanchez tweeted, “The prospect of any Internet rando being able to swap anyone’s face into porn is incredibly creepy. [read post]
2 Sep 2008, 5:17 pm
State of Tennessee, No. 06-6208 In civil rights suit alleging that city police discriminated against plaintiffs in violation of the Ame [read post]
21 Jul 2008, 9:14 pm
Haviland, No. 07-3380 Grant of a conditional writ of habeas corpus is affirmed where: 1) petitioner sought to represent himself at trial, and the trial court's failure to rule on his requests to proceed pro se deprived him of his Sixth Amendment right to self-representation; and 2) state courts' objectiv [read post]