Search for: "Standard Jury Instructions Criminal Cases"
Results 1381 - 1400
of 1,723
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
3 Jun 2010, 2:03 pm
Yesterday the Court issued opinions in two criminal cases, summarized below. [read post]
2 Jun 2010, 3:39 am
In fact, a higher standard than the original plaintiff’s attorney in Render v. [read post]
1 Jun 2010, 3:42 am
” The only other criminal case decided by the Court was US v. [read post]
27 May 2010, 10:30 am
Lynaugh, and holding that the Texas “special issue” jury instructions violated Supreme Court precedents requiring that jurors be given the opportunity “to give meaningful consideration and effect to all mitigating evidence that might provide a basis for refusing to impose the death penalty. [read post]
26 May 2010, 9:10 am
Here, there was no real “ex post facto” error; rather, the error was not instructing the jury that Marcus’s conduct was not unlawful until October 2000. [read post]
25 May 2010, 8:19 pm
At issue in the case was whether the Second Circuit’s plain-error standard of review for ex post facto violations was consistent with the Court’s interpretation of Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 52(b). [read post]
24 May 2010, 9:10 pm
Marcus, No. 08-1341 (5/24/2010) The circuit court impermissibly water downed the “plain error ” standard. [read post]
24 May 2010, 5:25 am
That's right: plaintiff's expert basically wished to instruct the jury on legal causation, which is a no-no . [read post]
23 May 2010, 8:41 pm
Alabama, should have instructed on lesser included offenses. [read post]
23 May 2010, 9:07 am
He agreed that the jury instruction was erroneous. [read post]
21 May 2010, 2:06 pm
• If you chose not to testify, in a jury trial, this judge would instruct the jury that they are absolutely prohibited from holding your silence against you. [read post]
21 May 2010, 6:12 am
The full accounting of the jury deliberations is complicated, but in short Juror No. 9 had difficulty interpreting the jury instructions about the difference between reasonable and unreasonable self-defense. [read post]
15 May 2010, 8:42 am
Unfortunately, his prosecution results in an opinion that is another blow to meaningful mens rea standards in federal criminal statutes. [read post]
9 May 2010, 9:14 pm
We therefore reverse the judgment of the Court of Criminal Appeals and remand this case for that court, in turn, to remand it to the trial court for an evidentiary hearing on the merits of Harrison’s juror-misconduct claims and a determination as to whether Harrison is entitled to a new trial. [read post]
8 May 2010, 8:53 am
This contains some interesting comments on the use of juries in defamation trials. [read post]
29 Apr 2010, 11:17 am
§ 1346 applies in cases where the jury did not find – nor did the district court instruct them that they had to find – that the defendants “reasonably contemplated identifiable economic harm,” and if the defendants’ reversal claim is preserved for review after they objected to the government’s request for a special verdict. [read post]
26 Apr 2010, 3:37 am
Parties make oral agreement for property purchase, buyer pays $35,500, but no written agreement signed; buyer entitled to return of money, as part payment doesn’t take case out of statute of frauds requirement that sale of real property be in writing, says 6th District… 2nd District holds that trial court erred in not granting continuance of trial date when plaintiff’s counsel withdrew 17 days before trial… Plaintiff should have submitted ssue of award of… [read post]
25 Apr 2010, 4:27 pm
N.J.A.C. 10:124-3.8 (2009), CHAPTER MANUAL OF STANDARDS FOR CHILDREN'S SHELTER FACILITIES AND HOMES, Criminal History Record Information background checks. 3. [read post]
20 Apr 2010, 8:27 am
Repeated requests at the state level for a new trial have failed, but in February, the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals ordered a new sentencing hearing on grounds relating to the jury instruction in his case, not the affair. [read post]
16 Apr 2010, 8:28 am
United States Docket: 09-583 Issue: Whether, in a discrimination case tried by a jury, the trial judge should, if requested to do so, instruct the jury that it may infer the existence of a discriminatory motive from the falsity of a defendant’s explanation of its action. [read post]
