Search for: "STATE v. WOODS" Results 1341 - 1360 of 3,002
Sort by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
9 Dec 2014, 10:13 pm by Daily Record Staff
Convicted by a jury, in the Circuit Court for Montgomery County, of two counts of armed robbery and three counts of first-degree assault, as well as use of a handgun in a crime of violence, and possession of a firearm by a disqualified individual, Michael Woods, appellant, contends that the evidence does not support his three assault convictions. [read post]
30 Nov 2014, 3:58 pm by Jag
Wood v Commissioner of Police for the Metropolis (2009) - Judgment Andrew Wood was an activist involved in the Campaign Against the Arms Trade (CAAT). [read post]
30 Nov 2014, 3:58 pm by Jag
Wood v Commissioner of Police for the Metropolis (2009) - Judgment Andrew Wood was an activist involved in the Campaign Against the Arms Trade (CAAT). [read post]
11 Nov 2014, 7:38 pm
The Aussie in question is Bill Ladas of King & Wood Mallesons, an enthusiastic contributor to that firm's IP Whiteboard blog and about whom it is boldly stated that "it’s a miracle he gets any “work” done at all". [read post]
11 Nov 2014, 7:03 am by Bryan Heaney
Background The petitioners, Mary Teresa Doogan and Concepta Wood, held promoted posts as midwives with Greater Glasgow Health Board. [read post]
5 Nov 2014, 4:47 pm by INFORRM
For example, individuals in the UK, and elsewhere, have been convicted of criminal offences (for example, DPP v Woods Unrep. [read post]
3 Nov 2014, 6:46 am by Joy Waltemath
The lower court also erred in dismissing her procedural due process claim; she had a property interest in her job based on an employment agreement specifying starting and ending dates for her teaching responsibilities (Meade v Moraine Valley Community College, October 30, 2014, Wood, D). [read post]
2 Nov 2014, 9:01 pm by Neil Cahn
Wood held that the underlying ground for the divorce is not the statement by theplaintiff. [read post]
29 Oct 2014, 3:41 pm
Nor had the Supreme Court yet ruled in United State v. [read post]