Search for: "Crawford, Appeal of"
Results 921 - 940
of 1,181
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
28 Apr 2008, 10:23 am
The decision comes in Crawford v. [read post]
25 Apr 2008, 4:57 pm
The danger for Obama is that another racial meltdown in the Democratic Party could add to his already complicated efforts in appealing to some white voters. [read post]
21 Apr 2008, 11:52 am
U.S. 1st Circuit Court of Appeals, April 16, 2008 US v. [read post]
18 Apr 2008, 2:33 am
If you are already an online subscriber to New York Law Journal you should be able to click on any of the links provided below, sign in, and access the full text of articles listed
Click here to go to www.nylj.com
Plea Upset Over Failure to Advise On Length of Felon's Supervision Subscription Required
'Crawford' Error Forces New Trial Subscription Required
New Parole Hearing Ordered for 'Model' Inmate Subscription… [read post]
16 Apr 2008, 9:04 am
Hardwick , No. 04-1369 Conviction for conspiracy to commit and aiding and abetting a murder-for-hire, in violation of 18 U.S.C. section 1958, is vacated and remanded where: 1) the district court's admission of a plea allocution was plain error under Crawford; but 2) the evidence presented at trial, including the improperly admitted plea allocution, was legally sufficient to prove section 1958's consideration element. [read post]
12 Apr 2008, 2:02 pm
Glen might well be retried and reconvicted, and will surely make a sufficiency argument on his second appeal. [read post]
8 Apr 2008, 4:43 pm
" Congress very intentionally chose to establish CMA as a "Court" -- remember that it was originally to be called the "Judicial Council" before the House Armed Services Committee changed it to the Court of Military Appeals. [read post]
8 Apr 2008, 1:47 pm
” The Supreme Court heard an appeal of one aspect of the Military Commissions Act last December: the act's abolition of habeas corpus rights for detainees. [read post]
8 Apr 2008, 7:35 am
One is the Sixth Amendment, which I think applies to the federal appeals case I describe above. [read post]
3 Apr 2008, 4:40 pm
I’m sure I’m not the only one who has been waiting for the result of the en banc rehearing of the Roommates.com case in the (US) 9th Circuit Court of Appeals (discussed on this blog here and here). [read post]
31 Mar 2008, 2:38 am
Crawford, No. 06-30205 (3-28-08). [read post]
30 Mar 2008, 9:45 am
Carty and Crawford teach that the Courts of Appeal (at least the Ninth) are effectively out of the sentencing business. [read post]
18 Mar 2008, 12:36 pm
Pack, 65 M.J. 381 (C.A.A.F. 2007).Here's the QP:Whether this Court should decide the unsettled question of federal law presented to the Court of Appeals for the Armed Forces in the case at bar; namely, if Crawford v. [read post]
17 Mar 2008, 2:38 pm
The appeal says that 44 states and Washington, D.C., now permit courts to admit forensic chemists' reports to establish that seized substances are illegal drugs, even when the chemists themselves are not called to testify. [read post]
17 Mar 2008, 11:34 am
Susan Crawford and Scotusblog and Slate’s new law blog, Convictions, all have more. * Most famously, Bono, who said (and I quote): This is really, really fucking brilliant. [read post]
17 Mar 2008, 7:11 am
Opinion below (Appeals Court of Massachusetts) Petition for certiorari Brief in opposition Petitioner's reply Amicus brief of Professor Pamela R. [read post]
17 Mar 2008, 3:44 am
Opinion below (Appeals Court of Massachusetts) Petition for certiorariBrief in opposition Petitioner's replyAmicus brief of Professor Pamela R. [read post]
16 Mar 2008, 8:18 am
Crawford, a Military Appeals Court judge, is the convening authority for military commissions and will decide whether alleged terrorists should face a capital case and be eligible for the death penalty. [read post]
16 Mar 2008, 1:46 am
Crawford, 2008 U.S. [read post]
13 Mar 2008, 3:38 pm
Judge Stucky, joined by Judge Baker, suggests the answer isn't clear -- or at least wasn't before the majority's opinion, thus precluding the military judge's admission of the evidence without objection from being considered plain error.The majority and the separate concurrence agree that plain error is to be measured at the time of appeal, not the time of trial. [read post]
