Search for: "Fisher v. State "
Results 1341 - 1360
of 2,027
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
14 Nov 2011, 6:23 am
Fisher clarifying the meaning of “clearly established federal law” under AEDPA. [read post]
12 Nov 2011, 10:51 am
Greene v. [read post]
11 Nov 2011, 4:28 pm
Greene v. [read post]
11 Nov 2011, 6:54 am
Fisher, proponents of federal habeas review of state criminal convictions were firmly brought back to reality. [read post]
10 Nov 2011, 1:30 pm
” Fisher v. [read post]
10 Nov 2011, 12:13 pm
United States, 11-5842, Fisher v. [read post]
10 Nov 2011, 6:26 am
Tuesday’s arguments in the GPS surveillance case United States v. [read post]
9 Nov 2011, 9:37 am
” Daniel Fisher of Forbes reports on Monday’s cert. grant in Magner v. [read post]
8 Nov 2011, 11:20 pm
While the appeal was pending before the Pennsylvania Supreme Court the United States Supreme Court ruled in Gray v. [read post]
8 Nov 2011, 8:00 am
Fisher [SCOTUSblog backgrounder; JURIST report] that, for purposes of the Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act (AEDPA), "clearly established federal law" is limited to Supreme Court decisions "as of the time of the relevant state-court adjudication on the merits. [read post]
8 Nov 2011, 7:41 am
Fisher. [read post]
7 Nov 2011, 12:06 pm
The opinion explicitly rejected U.S. cases on the doctrine, including Brenner v Manson, 383 U.S. 519 (1966) and in re Fisher, 421 F.3d 1365 (2005). [read post]
7 Nov 2011, 7:48 am
. : Ontario Bar Association, Continuing Legal Education, 2011 1 v. [read post]
6 Nov 2011, 12:16 pm
" United States v. [read post]
3 Nov 2011, 12:10 pm
Earlier this month, retired Justice John Paul Stevens sat down with one of his former clerks, Stanford law professor Jeffrey Fisher, for an interview. [read post]
2 Nov 2011, 9:54 am
Fishers, Inc., supra (quoting U.S. v. [read post]
1 Nov 2011, 5:39 am
Cooper and Missouri v. [read post]
31 Oct 2011, 9:26 am
Fisher, No. 11-2245, will appear at CCH 2011-2 Trade Cases ¶77,663. [read post]
31 Oct 2011, 7:00 am
Also at Verdict, Vikram Amar analyzes the possible procedural defects in Fisher v. [read post]
