Search for: "California v. Johnson"
Results 1281 - 1300
of 1,649
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
7 Oct 2021, 9:03 pm
Supreme Court’s divided opinions in June Medical Services v. [read post]
20 Nov 2021, 7:29 am
Gil v. [read post]
16 Nov 2010, 9:19 am
Schafer: Dale Schafer and Marion Fry challenged federal convictions arising from their operation of a medical marijuana growing operation and dispensary in the Sierra Nevada community of Cool, California. [read post]
2 Jun 2017, 6:36 am
Alabama in holding that race predominated in the drawing of 28 legislative districts in North Carolina, and correctly applied the Supreme Court’s rulings in Johnson v. [read post]
3 Dec 2015, 12:25 pm
Franklin California Tax-Free Trust, 15-233, and Acosta-Febo v. [read post]
21 Jan 2018, 8:14 pm
See California v. [read post]
30 Nov 2015, 4:10 am
Kim v. [read post]
11 Jun 2018, 5:01 am
A recent case, Johnson v. [read post]
9 Mar 2016, 11:30 am
That strategy helped secure the unanimous 1991 Supreme Court ruling in UAW v. [read post]
10 Jan 2024, 8:05 pm
Johnson, which has gained some media attention. [read post]
6 Jan 2025, 11:00 am
Laura Coordes, Harrington v. [read post]
8 Jun 2021, 5:45 pm
See, e.g., Assoc. of Civilian Technicians v. [read post]
23 May 2012, 4:00 pm
Johnson, 11-1053, a state-on-top habeas case out of the Third Circuit; Parker, Warden v. [read post]
21 Oct 2019, 12:15 am
The Data Protection Report has covered the most recent amendments to the California Consumer Privacy Act being signed into force. [read post]
3 Apr 2016, 4:23 pm
California’s attorney general has announced. [read post]
10 Jan 2013, 1:13 pm
California satisfies the requirement for a defendant to revoke his prior waiver of counsel at trial and require reappointment of counsel to file a motion for new trial. [read post]
19 Sep 2023, 7:42 am
[I will blog the NetChoice v. [read post]
13 Oct 2021, 9:08 am
Johnson v. [read post]
13 Oct 2021, 9:08 am
Johnson v. [read post]
1 Dec 2024, 8:33 pm
Thus, at least in the California case, though Hunter was pardoned, under the Arpaio precedent, the conviction will stand. [read post]
