Search for: "People v. Li"
Results 121 - 140
of 3,037
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
12 Aug 2007, 7:39 am
Oddly enough, we don't think the answer lies in medical science. [read post]
13 May 2010, 5:28 am
Paul, Rust v. [read post]
26 Oct 2011, 6:50 am
This was the case in U.S. v. [read post]
28 Jun 2022, 5:58 am
Bell, Secrets and Lies: News Media and Law Enforcement Use of Deception as an Investigative Tool, 60 U. [read post]
4 Oct 2011, 6:29 pm
The oral argument transcript in Maples v. [read post]
24 Mar 2021, 3:26 pm
Lies, damn lies, and federal Indian law: The ethics of citing racist precedent in contemporary federal Indian law. [read post]
20 Aug 2019, 7:48 am
State v. [read post]
28 Sep 2010, 12:46 pm
Crogan (9th Cir. 2005) and People v. [read post]
26 Jul 2007, 10:01 am
As a way of exorcising the demons in my video rental past, I now present my completely unbiased and totally honest list of the ten biggest lies Blockbuster Video tells their customers. 10. [read post]
18 Sep 2007, 3:49 pm
In People v. [read post]
9 Oct 2017, 9:01 pm
In 1972, the Court went further and found in Eisenstadt v. [read post]
26 Jun 2015, 7:14 am
From the majority opinion in Obergefell v. [read post]
14 Jun 2023, 7:59 pm
By Philip Won & Véronique Li, Senior Medical Device Regulation Expert —“Total Product Life Cycle Advisory Program or TAP pilot — the most exciting thing in MDUFA V. [read post]
29 Apr 2011, 4:05 am
In Islamic Shura Council of Southern California v. [read post]
29 Mar 2008, 12:45 pm
It is fairly common for sweeping employment law legislation to be introduced in the California legislature and I usually do not pay much attention to these bills because they usually do not become law.One of two things almost always happens: (1) the republicans introduce a pro-employer bill that will never pass the democratically-controlled legislature or (2) the democrats introduce a pro-employee bill that passes but is then vetoed by Governor Schwarzenegger.However, I gave an interview to a… [read post]
23 Sep 2010, 1:45 pm
In Perry v. [read post]
10 Nov 2020, 4:55 pm
For more on this, see U.S. v. [read post]
26 Jan 2015, 6:51 pm
The proscription in the title or this post is slightly more limited (federal agents) and based not on the Constitution, but on a particular federal statute: 18 USC § 1001.In New York, for example, the police are permitted to lie to you (“we got your fingerprints on the murder weapon,” “we've got a video of you leaving the 7-11,” “your codefendant is saying it was all you, he didn’t do anything,”) in order to get you to tell the truth, so long… [read post]
4 Feb 2020, 12:41 pm
Yet, that presumption lies at the foundation of our criminal justice system, requiring trial courts to instruct juries about the presumption without minimizing its importance (see CPL § 300.10[2]; People v Hall, 155 AD2d 344, 346-347 [1st Dept 1989]). [read post]
