Search for: "STATE v DIAZ" Results 921 - 940 of 1,160
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
27 May 2024, 9:12 pm
  If the Court were to adopt the view that this is not enough to render a lab report testimonial, then it would be a simple matter for labs always to avoid the rule of Melendez-Diaz v. [read post]
9 Dec 2011, 6:07 am by Aaron Tang
I really do hope that the Court doesn’t edge back towards Ohio v. [read post]
23 Jun 2011, 12:35 pm by Lyle Denniston
  Since the most recent sequel, the 5-4 decision in Melendez-Diaz v. [read post]
6 Dec 2011, 5:16 am by Aaron Tang
Today in the Community we are discussing the latest in the line of the Court’s Confrontation Clause cases:  Williams v. [read post]
17 Nov 2023, 4:00 am by Shea Denning
Supreme Court’s denial of review in State v. [read post]
3 Oct 2011, 7:04 am by Lyle Denniston
Nokia, 10-1064), and a request to clear up a conflict among lower courts on police authority to review the contents of a cellphone after taking the device from a person they have arrested and taken to a police station (Diaz v. [read post]
8 Aug 2017, 5:06 am by Law Offices of Jeffrey S. Glassman
  This law, which has been applied in various other states, was addressed in a landmark case in the Commonwealth of Massachusetts entitled Diaz v. [read post]
25 Jun 2009, 3:21 am
The court issued its rulings this morning.A big win in Melendez-Diaz v. [read post]
24 Dec 2017, 2:00 am by Thaddeus Mason Pope, JD, PhD
• What are potential approaches for physicians, including those practicing in states where it is legal, those who receive a request for access when the practice is legal in nearby states but not in the state of practice, and those who practice in a state where it is legal but are personally opposed to physician-assisted death. [read post]
11 Mar 2008, 8:46 am
Phillips, No. 07-0522 Grant of habeas petition ordering conviction be vacated based on state's Brady violation is vacated in part as to barring of retrial of count of depraved indifference murder as petitioner had not exhausted his state remedies with respect to that relief. [read post]