Search for: "Sovereign v. People (1983)"
Results 101 - 119
of 119
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
28 May 2009, 7:07 am
Brandon v. [read post]
10 Nov 2008, 10:39 pm
Parliament had already decided the matter with the Representation of the People Act 1983. [read post]
19 Aug 2008, 8:28 pm
Spoons, Inc. v. [read post]
4 Aug 2008, 7:06 pm
Reyeros, No. 06-1485, 06-1486 Convictions and sentence for conspiracy to import cocaine are affirmed where: 1) there was sufficient evidence that defendant knew the specific object of the conspiracy; 2) documents in the possession of a foreign sovereign and never seen by the government were not subject to Brady or Jencks disclosure; 3) there was no individual or cumulative unfairness in the court's rulings on a motion to sever, evidentiary questions, or alleged prosecutorial… [read post]
4 Aug 2008, 6:17 pm
" Supreme Court of California, July 28, 2008 People v. [read post]
25 Jun 2008, 6:15 pm
However, district courts may not exercise their habeas jurisdiction to enjoin the United States from transferring individuals alleged to have committed crimes and detained within the territory of a foreign sovereign to that sovereign's government for criminal prosecution. [read post]
10 Jun 2008, 2:36 pm
Supreme Court, June 02, 2008 US v. [read post]
27 May 2008, 10:06 am
Ctr. for Women v. [read post]
27 May 2008, 9:50 am
Ctr. for Women v. [read post]
5 May 2008, 4:52 pm
[xiv] Most people just call it “section 1983. [read post]
21 Apr 2008, 11:52 am
Baze v. [read post]
11 Feb 2008, 8:08 am
Evinger, No. 06-2103 "In a prisoner's suit brought under 42 U.S.C. section 1983 against several correctional officials claiming that they retaliated against plaintiff because he tried to obtain evidence to defend himself against a disciplinary charge, dismissal of the suit is affirmed wh [read post]
5 Feb 2008, 8:11 am
U.S. 1st Circuit Court of Appeals, January 29, 2008 US v. [read post]
5 Feb 2008, 7:42 am
California Appellate Districts, January 30, 2008 People v. [read post]
30 Jan 2008, 7:35 am
Bureau of Prisons, No. 06-9130 I"n a case involving the scope of 28 U.S.C. section 2680, which carves out certain exceptions to the United States' waiver of sovereign immunity for torts committed by federal employees, the Court rules that section 2680's broad phrase "any other law enforcement officer" covers all law enforcement officers, and not just law enforcement officers enforcing customs or excise laws. [read post]
18 Jan 2008, 1:04 pm
Clancy v. [read post]
15 Jan 2008, 1:50 pm
Supreme Court, January 07, 2008 Arave v. [read post]
27 Nov 2007, 6:20 am
Grotke, 702 F.2d 49, 51-52 (2d Cir. 1983)). [read post]
