Search for: "United States v. Miller"
Results 1241 - 1260
of 2,350
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
18 Dec 2011, 8:43 am
But, United States v. [read post]
29 Aug 2017, 7:56 am
United States, in which a defendant is asking the court to consider the dual-sovereignty exception to the double jeopardy clause of the Constitution that allows state and federal governments to prosecute an individual for the same action. [read post]
7 Jan 2010, 4:10 am
See Miller v. [read post]
23 Mar 2011, 6:00 am
” United States v. [read post]
10 Jan 2014, 2:58 pm
Miller, 152 F.3d 813 (8th Cir.1998)). [read post]
19 Mar 2015, 8:05 am
Donald 14-618Issue: (1) Whether the Michigan courts' decision not to extend United States v. [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]
8 Feb 2024, 2:41 pm
Term Limits v. [read post]
6 Feb 2017, 1:16 pm
(Pl.'s SUMF ¶ 58) On April 7, 2015, Assistant Prosecuting Attorney Frank Miller dismissed the case against Plaintiff by nolle prosequi. [read post]
11 Mar 2019, 9:01 pm
INS (2001), and United States v. [read post]
31 Dec 2023, 3:30 pm
United States law determines this by considering: (1) whether the accused infringer actually had access to the original work; and (2) whether the accused infringing work is “substantially similar” to the original work. [read post]
20 Jun 2013, 9:01 pm
And in Lawrence v. [read post]
3 Feb 2024, 4:54 pm
Mazer v. [read post]
27 Jun 2012, 5:03 am
His thoughts are at the end of this post about Miller v. [read post]
15 Jun 2012, 9:52 am
United States v. [read post]
28 Aug 2024, 2:23 pm
As attorneys licensed to practice law in Oregon, we took an oath to "support the Constitution and the laws of the United States and of the State of Oregon. [read post]
9 Feb 2016, 12:01 am
The Supreme Court upheld the legislation in United States v. [read post]
1 Jul 2019, 11:58 am
Aurelius Investment, United States v. [read post]
26 Jun 2019, 9:01 pm
Section One straightforwardly provides: The right of citizens of the United States to vote shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or by any State on account of sex.Moving beyond the bare text, it is important, even (maybe especially) a hundred years later, to think more about what the Amendment really sought to constitutionally accomplish, and how its full import has not been deeply understood. [read post]
31 May 2018, 11:18 am
Its first section read, “equality of rights under the law shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or by any State on account of sex. [read post]
