Search for: "State v. Provens"
Results 121 - 140
of 6,296
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
8 Dec 2016, 6:41 am
Justice Gogoi, upholding the principal laid down in William Staney v State of Madhya Pradesh (SC 1956, AIR 116), also took into consideration that the victim did not die on the spot or very shortly after the infliction of injuries but survived for some days in the hospital before death.On a literal interpretation, the judgment seems in consonance with S 300(a) and (b) of the Indian Penal Code. [read post]
12 Oct 2009, 2:07 pm
Since then, Mills has proven to be a powerful tool for defense lawyers aiming to overturn death sentences in numerous other states. [read post]
24 Feb 2020, 10:13 am
In Breest v. [read post]
17 Sep 2018, 5:28 am
Moreno v. [read post]
21 Jan 2014, 11:54 am
To support its rationale, the court relied on United States v. [read post]
14 Sep 2017, 6:36 am
The Court concluded that consistent with Mozes v. [read post]
20 Dec 2011, 4:55 pm
Ashutosh Avinash Bhagwat (University of California, Davis - School of Law) has posted Sorrell v. [read post]
1 Sep 2011, 5:29 pm
ABSTRACT: When it was decided in 2002, Ring v. [read post]
2 Dec 2014, 2:27 pm
United States v. [read post]
19 Jul 2012, 6:56 am
Co. v. [read post]
19 Jul 2012, 6:56 am
Co. v. [read post]
10 Jun 2018, 3:45 pm
In State v. [read post]
26 Dec 2019, 10:41 am
State v. [read post]
11 Mar 2010, 12:37 pm
Diamond has proven quite controversial. [read post]
22 Oct 2016, 9:56 am
Deviating from our usual fare of ocean and land related cases, we wade into a constitutional thicket and report on Dannenberg v. [read post]
22 Oct 2016, 9:56 am
Deviating from our usual fare of ocean and land related cases, we wade into a constitutional thicket and report on Dannenberg v. [read post]
22 Oct 2016, 9:56 am
Deviating from our usual fare of ocean and land related cases, we wade into a constitutional thicket and report on Dannenberg v. [read post]
18 Mar 2012, 7:53 pm
The charges in the complaint are allegations, and the defendants are presumed innocent unless and until proven guilty. [read post]
16 May 2014, 2:12 pm
” Méndez v. [read post]
29 Jun 2016, 4:57 am
"The Court stated, "Our recognition of the relevance of prior bad acts that have been alleged in court filings, but not proven at trial, is consistent with our precedent; we have previously decided that there is no prohibition against cross-examining a witness about bad acts that have never been formally proven at a trial (cite omitted). [read post]
