Search for: "Cunningham v. United States" Results 101 - 120 of 264
Sort by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
7 Jun 2015, 5:24 pm by Kevin LaCroix
Supreme Court issued its 2010 decision in Morrison v. [read post]
3 Jun 2015, 1:08 pm by Lucie Olejnikova
Team Members: Joseph Fortunato (3L), Sameer Ponkshe (3L) In this year’s competition titled United States v. [read post]
4 Mar 2015, 5:02 am by The Public Employment Law Press
Citing People v Weaver (12 NY3d 433) and United States v Jones (132 S Ct 945}, the Court of Appeals ruled that the State agency's action was a search within the meaning of the State and Federal Constitutions and “did not require a warrant” but “on the facts of this case such surveillance was  unreasonable”The decision TLC decision is posted on the Internet… [read post]
20 Jan 2015, 3:18 pm by Benjamin Wittes
A federal judge ordered his release in March 2010, but the United States government has fought that order. [read post]
12 Jan 2015, 6:42 am by Clara Spera
The Times reports that North Korea has attempted to strike a deal with the United States: the dictatorship would halt its nuclear tests in exchange for the United States suspending routine military exercises with South Korea. [read post]
7 Nov 2014, 5:52 am
  By our count, federal judges have trampled over state sovereignty with respect to the heeding presumption in no fewer than eleven states – Alaska, Colorado (despite contrary state-court authority), Georgia, Hawaii, Illinois, Iowa, Kentucky, Maine, New York (despite contrary state-court authority), South Dakota, and Wyoming.Finally, because various states have taken quite different approaches to whether a heeding presumption exists at all and… [read post]
5 Sep 2014, 11:29 am
And the United States Supreme Court and courts of other states have treated the right as extending beyond firearms. [read post]
31 Mar 2014, 7:35 am by Jessica Smith
Almost two years after the United States Supreme Court decided Miller v. [read post]
17 Mar 2014, 1:37 pm by Thaddeus Hoffmeister
United States, 133 S.Ct. 2151 (2013), require that the jury find facts justifying an increase in either end of the range of the prescribed penalty. [read post]