Search for: "People v. Case"
Results 1261 - 1280
of 52,286
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
22 Feb 2011, 4:09 pm
He noted that two people who had reacted to the protest made by the Appellants were charged and convicted for their actions. [read post]
23 Sep 2014, 1:27 pm
This case, however, fits the criteria for an exception to the mootness doctrine. [read post]
10 Jul 2007, 5:15 am
Let's draw some conclusions that will become more relevant, particularly as we get to the last of the three backdating cases, Desimone v. [read post]
8 Jun 2020, 12:44 pm
Does it bother anyone else that the police officer's body cam footage "just so happens" to stop when it does in this case? [read post]
13 Mar 2023, 4:40 pm
At least in San Bernardino county, where this case arises. [read post]
25 Jun 2019, 4:27 pm
This time with proper instructions.Plus, at least at present, he's still ineligible to practice law.The underlying facts bespeak substantial caution whenever you're negotiating a civil settlement in which one of the aspects of the case is that some of the parties previously had an affair and you're arguably getting "hush money" to keep it quiet. [read post]
21 Oct 2020, 3:35 pm
Google looks for it.It's a fairly chilling case from San Diego about how various women get "groomed" into participating in child pornography. [read post]
30 May 2014, 11:21 am
I'm not sure why I've seen a rise in the number of cases in which the sentence seems unduly lenient. [read post]
17 Apr 2013, 1:08 pm
For those doubters, I'd suggest reading this opinion.It's a classic case where legislative history matters. [read post]
29 Jul 2014, 12:23 pm
So you've got to definitely be aware of that downside.I also thought it was interesting that the defendant's name in this case was "Redd". [read post]
11 Dec 2020, 3:29 pm
I'll add this one thought to the cogent and insightful comments expressed by Justice Dato:This case doesn't get reversed on Fourth Amendment grounds in the era before police officers started wearing body-worn cameras. [read post]
7 Dec 2023, 1:23 pm
The case was argued in June of 2020 and here we are with an opinion in December 2023.You can read the whole thing if you're keenly interested in what it's about. [read post]
22 Aug 2014, 12:39 pm
But if the defendant in this case isn't entitled to present (as he did at his first trial) a defense under the Medical Marijuana Program Act, I don't know who is.The jury at his first trial split evenly as to whether to convict him. [read post]
15 May 2024, 2:14 pm
It doesn't contain a single case citation. [read post]
9 Apr 2018, 12:34 pm
Barboza was a minor whose case was direct charged in adult court, and Prop. 47 was about to be voted on by the electorate later that year. [read post]
8 Nov 2007, 7:25 am
Lindor's legal defense in UMG v. [read post]
19 Jun 2018, 3:43 pm
Commentators have treated the Court’s decision in Whitford v. [read post]
18 May 2023, 1:21 pm
Twitter, Inc. v. [read post]
30 Jan 2024, 1:08 pm
This case emphasises the lesson from Amersi v Leslie [2023] EWHC 1368 (KB) that when approaching the issue of serious harm the tort rules of causation are still in play and should not be overlooked. [read post]
14 Feb 2007, 10:38 am
It's a criminal case, and the victim, who was allegedly set on fire by her spouse (and subsequently died), made two sets of statements that incriminated her husband.I agree with Justice Suzukawa that the first statement was admissible hearsay under the spontaneous utterance rule, even though it wasn't all that spontaneous -- indeed, was made under police questioning. [read post]
