Search for: "State v. Record"
Results 1121 - 1140
of 44,168
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
24 Jul 2023, 8:55 am
Part V argues that bad data should be conceptualized under broader critiques of racialized, algorithmic injustice and offers solutions for better regulating and using criminal records. [read post]
24 Aug 2020, 1:10 pm
You should state once again that you do not consent to the search or seizure of your phone. [read post]
8 Apr 2009, 5:04 am
Carroll v. [read post]
29 Jun 2015, 6:58 am
State v. [read post]
29 Oct 2008, 8:01 am
In tax and fraud trial, computer records, including Quickbooks financial records, seized from a co-defendant's computer, were admissible as records in furtherance of the conspiracy under FRE 801(d)(2)(E), in United States v. [read post]
19 Jun 2022, 5:08 am
In American Center for Law and Justice v. [read post]
5 Feb 2011, 11:09 am
See State v. [read post]
23 Mar 2015, 3:38 pm
See Mickman v. [read post]
28 Apr 2014, 3:52 pm
Sterling gave V. [read post]
3 Nov 2011, 3:34 pm
You can start with this Oregonian article: “If an Oregon police officer is recording your traffic stop, it's legal to make your own recording of the encounter," by Aimee Green, The Oregonian, Monday, October 31, 2011, updated Tuesday, November 01, 2011 Or, read the case without passing “The O” State v. [read post]
14 Mar 2008, 4:10 am
The record here shows a long relationship. [read post]
20 Apr 2017, 11:05 am
State v. [read post]
27 Apr 2023, 12:49 pm
State v. [read post]
7 May 2019, 1:54 pm
The case, Frasier v. [read post]
6 Feb 2020, 4:44 am
State v. [read post]
10 Jan 2012, 6:20 pm
Under United States v. [read post]
9 Mar 2021, 12:22 pm
In State v. [read post]
14 Nov 2018, 6:58 am
Criminal procedure — Illegal sentence — Motion to amend commitment record Stephen Blair Jackson, appellant, appeals from an order issued by the Circuit Court for Anne Arundel County denying his motion to amend the commitment record in his criminal case. [read post]
26 Oct 2009, 7:59 am
Check the Wood v. [read post]
9 Dec 2011, 2:33 pm
United States v. [read post]
