Search for: "Lopez v. State"
Results 1181 - 1200
of 1,436
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
5 Jan 2009, 2:28 pm
Feingold v. [read post]
31 Oct 2023, 11:29 am
State v. [read post]
23 Sep 2009, 10:48 am
Lopez, 419 U.S. 565 (1975), the Supreme Court decided what procedural protections are due under the United States Constitution in cases of student suspensions for 10 days or less. [read post]
31 May 2008, 12:55 am
United States v. [read post]
27 Dec 2010, 1:45 pm
One of them, for instance, is United States v. [read post]
17 Nov 2008, 6:39 pm
Buie, No. 070258 Sentence of fifteen years for being a felon in possession of a firearm is affirmed where: 1) because the maximum penalty for the offense to which defendant pleaded guilty was ten years or more under state statute, defendant's state felony narcotics conviction qualified as a "serious drug offense" under the Armed Career Criminal Act (ACCA); and 2) defendant's allegation that he was deprived of counsel at his plea hearing did not state a… [read post]
Business and criminal law, health care reform, and chicken mole poblano and rosemary mashed potatoes
22 Jun 2012, 1:30 pm
ANGEL LOPEZ, Appellant, v. [read post]
1 Feb 2016, 5:47 pm
JONES, Appellant, v. [read post]
30 Jun 2022, 9:25 am
Lopez v. [read post]
25 Sep 2011, 7:25 pm
Lopez, and five years later in United States v. [read post]
16 Dec 2010, 7:47 pm
Andre In Overhill Farms, Inc. v. [read post]
18 Dec 2007, 7:42 am
Box 48314 Olympia, WA 98504-8314 Phone: (360) 586-3558; (800) 634-4473 (V/TTY/Toll Free) Web: www.wa.gov/ddc Helping Hands for the Disabled P.O. [read post]
7 Mar 2011, 1:39 pm
” The majority cited the Supreme Court’s 2003 opinion in Raytheon Co v Hernandez in support. [read post]
9 Dec 2009, 7:45 am
Filburn and Gonzales v. [read post]
11 Jul 2022, 1:05 pm
United States v. [read post]
7 Aug 2023, 9:41 am
I removed the State v. [read post]
17 Aug 2011, 6:41 am
Lopez), the Necessary and Proper Clause (United States v. [read post]
3 Apr 2012, 11:50 am
Lopez, in a 5? [read post]
18 May 2009, 5:24 am
’ (China Law Blog) Europe ECJ finds similar marks on wine and glasses not likely to cause confusion: Waterford Wedgewood plc v Assembled Investments (Proprietary) Ltd, OHIM (Class 46) (IPKat) AG Colomer opines in Maple leaf trade mark battle: joined cases American Clothing Associates SA v OHIM and OHIM v American Clothing Associates SA (IPKat) (Excess Copyright) CFI: Restitutio and time limits: how does the law stand now for CTMs? [read post]
29 Jun 2012, 9:56 am
See McLaughlin v. [read post]
