Search for: "State v. Mays"
Results 1321 - 1340
of 120,423
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
7 Sep 2015, 5:56 pm
Criminal procedure — Hearsay — Victim’s statements to police On May 6, 2014, following a one-day bench trial in the Circuit Court for Talbot County, the court found Adrian Kmar Waters, appellant, guilty on three counts of second degree assault related to incidents on April 22, 2013, and May 29, 2013, both involving the same ... [read post]
1 Feb 2011, 10:43 am
The circuit court denied his claims in orders entered on March 4, 2009, May 22, [...] [read post]
16 May 2016, 1:53 pm
Manning [SCOTUSblog materials] that a securities fraud case may proceed in state court. [read post]
8 Nov 2010, 8:57 am
[JURIST] The US Supreme Court [official website; JURIST news archive] on Monday unanimously ruled [opinion, PDF] that lower federal courts may not issue writs of habeas corpus to state prisoners unless their confinement violates federal law. [read post]
30 Sep 2024, 7:07 pm
Washington Post [unpaywalled]: “Access to abortion remains a patchwork of state-by-state policies nearly two years after the Supreme Court overturned Roe v. [read post]
8 Dec 2014, 6:33 am
State v. [read post]
2 May 2010, 12:14 pm
On May 6th, U.S. [read post]
8 May 2015, 7:00 am
Mandalia v Secretary of State for the Home Department, heard 7 May 2015. [read post]
16 Feb 2017, 6:38 am
In Prince v. [read post]
15 Feb 2011, 1:59 am
May 26, 2010) (alteration in original) (quoting IMG Fragrance Brands, LLC v. [read post]
14 Mar 2019, 10:55 am
A landmark 2008 decision by the New Jersey Supreme Court, State v. [read post]
9 Dec 2010, 8:02 pm
(Ilya Somin) Senior Conspirator Eugene Volokh recently linked to a Law and the Multiverse post suggesting that Batman may be a state actor under current law. [read post]
8 May 2017, 1:00 am
R (Kiarie) v Secretary of State for the Home Department; R (Byndloss) v Secretary of State for the Home Department, heard 15-16 February 2017. [read post]
28 May 2014, 1:28 pm
But take your lumps and admit that what transpired should not have occurred.Because only then will you have a chance of getting paragraphs like this one from Judge Kozinski:"After oral argument before us, the United States Attorney 'concede[d] that [the] cross-examination of defendant was error' and advised us that she 'has instituted—in addition to existing training—a semi-monthly training update for the Criminal Division regarding pre-trial and trial… [read post]
7 May 2018, 1:00 am
On Tuesday 8 and Wednesday 9 May, the Supreme Court will hear the appeal of R (Hallam) v Secretary of State for Justice; R (Nealon) v Secretary of State for Justice. [read post]
6 Nov 2012, 6:14 am
United States v. [read post]
28 May 2019, 2:00 am
With regard to the state’s reliance on Ward v. [read post]
19 Sep 2016, 7:53 am
In Fischer v. [read post]
20 Oct 2020, 11:33 am
Texas v. [read post]
18 Jul 2023, 9:05 pm
Recently, in United States v. [read post]
