Search for: "People v Legall" Results 1001 - 1020 of 31,073
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
7 Feb 2019, 4:47 pm by INFORRM
In the case of R (P, G and W) and Anor v Secretary of State for the Home Department and Anor [2019] UKSC 3 the Supreme Court upheld challenges to the legal regimes for disclosing criminal records in England and Wales, and Northern Ireland, finding them to be incompatible with Article 8 of the European Convention on Human Rights (“ECHR”). [read post]
22 Apr 2009, 12:26 pm
In my experience, people did sometimes stick things in my underwear. [read post]
27 Jan 2011, 9:14 am by Stephen D. Rosenberg
I have been blogging long enough that I can bore people by pontificating about how blogging was easier back in the old days. [read post]
4 Jan 2009, 2:04 pm
One student points out Ciano v. [read post]
30 Oct 2008, 1:39 pm
Daily Legal News and podcast up on Insitelaw Delighted to see a small rise in listening figures for my daily news podcasts. [read post]
9 Oct 2014, 6:38 pm by Donald Thompson
 With respect to grand jury proceedings, the district attorney has a “duty of fair dealing to the accused” (People v Pelchat, 62 NY2d 97, 105 [1984]; see also, People v Lancaster, 69 NY2d 20, 26 [1986]) and to the court (People v Ianniello, 21 NY2d 418, 424 [1968]). [read post]
7 Dec 2010, 4:08 am by Legal Beagle
The Govan Law Centre has today accused the Scottish Legal Aid Board of denying access to justice to one of its clients in a bank charges case after SLAB refused for a second time (after an internal appeal) to fund the case (Sharp v Bank of Scotland) with civil legal aid. [read post]
4 Jun 2024, 7:31 am by Andy Gillin
Last updated: 07/31/2022 People who follow the news in the United States are not strangers to disturbing legal stories that often dominate the headlines. [read post]
30 Dec 2013, 3:17 pm
As held in People v Lewis, People v Ventimiglia, People v Santarelli and People v Allweiss, it is elementary that evidence of a defendant's prior criminal or immoral conduct is inadmissible if it cannot logically be linked to some specific material issue in the case. [read post]