Search for: "People v. More"
Results 1161 - 1180
of 43,367
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
31 Jan 2008, 9:44 pm
DC v. [read post]
29 Jun 2007, 7:47 am
Over at my Legal Blog Watch Beat, I posted about the Walmart v. [read post]
31 Jan 2008, 9:44 pm
DC v. [read post]
16 Nov 2010, 12:32 am
The opinion below is People v. [read post]
5 Nov 2021, 5:04 am
" That is a factor of more than 100--even more extreme than in Unwired. [read post]
16 Jun 2012, 2:47 pm
the court has no discretion; concurrent sentences are mandated' " (People v Roundtree, 75 AD3d 1136, 1138, lv denied 15 NY3d 855, quoting People v Hamilton, 4 NY3d 654, 658; see People v Cromwell, 71 AD3d 414, 415, lv denied 15 NY3d 803; People v Mercer, 66 AD3d 1368, 1370, lv denied 13 NY3d 940). [read post]
10 Jun 2011, 11:49 am
"Terry v. [read post]
3 Mar 2024, 11:35 am
Most significantly, the recent Supreme Court case Cedar Point Nursery v. [read post]
15 Jun 2024, 9:21 am
See Banks v. [read post]
9 Oct 2019, 8:19 pm
What is the something more? [read post]
20 Jan 2018, 1:51 am
Steeves, 525 F.2d 33, 38 (8th Cir. 1975) (upholding a warrant on the basis that "people who own pistols generally keep them at home or on their persons"); United States v. [read post]
14 Sep 2013, 11:28 am
Such misconduct may impair a defendant's due process rights and require a reversal of the conviction (see, e.g., People v Robertson, 12 NY2d 355; People v Savvides, 1 NY2d 554; People v Creasy, 236 NY 205; Napue v Illinois, 360 US 264; Alcorta v Texas, 355 US 28). [read post]
20 Mar 2012, 10:44 am
PrometheusAll in all it seemed to me that the majority of the court seemed more skeptical about the Mayo position and more supportive of the Prometheus position. [read post]
17 Apr 2010, 7:38 am
People v. [read post]
1 May 2008, 10:38 am
Since there are few legal restrictions on consensual sex between adults at this point, however, it is not illegal for three or more people to cohabit, even if they regard themselves as married. [read post]
20 Jul 2018, 12:18 am
Making this list known may put some pressure on the SPC to undertake more public consultation. [read post]
11 Aug 2012, 9:01 pm
The Supreme Court found one such exception in the 1981 case of Michigan v. [read post]
1 Jun 2023, 11:43 am
We should know more after the court releases its order list next Monday. [read post]
23 Aug 2010, 12:07 pm
The rule only applies when you have only a single offense, not when (as with Dan) there's more than one.So back to Cuba for you, Dan. [read post]
14 Oct 2009, 5:00 am
In Cho v. [read post]
