Search for: "People v. Givens" Results 1441 - 1460 of 17,544
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
2 Feb 2015, 7:45 am
App. 1981) (speeding and odor of alcohol beverage); People v. [read post]
12 Feb 2010, 6:37 am by David Bernstein
  Plus, given his blogging about Sarah Palin, Trig, et al., is there much reason to think he hasn’t gone off the deep end generally? [read post]
21 Aug 2022, 5:06 am by Bernard Bell
  Dick Clark, one of the most popular disc jockeys at the time, was suspected to taking payola given the widespread nature of the practice. [read post]
4 Nov 2010, 5:00 am by Kimberly A. Kralowec
The Supreme Court heard oral argument on November 3, 2010 in Kwikset Corp. v. [read post]
11 May 2010, 3:45 pm by Orin Kerr
McCane, 573 F.3d 1037, 1041–45 (10th Cir. 2009) (same); People v. [read post]
12 Jan 2025, 10:45 am by Eric Goldman
The court explains: Deepfakes are image, audio, or video files that mimic real or nonexistent people saying and doing things that never happened. [read post]
18 May 2011, 10:49 am by Michael M. O'Hear
 In fact, it turns out that Minnesota has far more total people under criminal-justice supervision than Wisconsin. [read post]
17 May 2011, 8:04 pm by Michael O'Hear
 In fact, it turns out that Minnesota has far more total people under criminal-justice supervision than Wisconsin. [read post]
26 May 2015, 2:00 pm
Courts have recognized that under Penal Law § 35.10(1) a parent may use physical force against a child when he reasonably believes it to be necessary to promote discipline or the child's welfare (see Fields, 134 AD2dat 365; see People v Prue, 219 AD2d 873 [4th Dept 1995]; People v Thompson, 9 Misc 3d 1123[A] [City Ct, Westchester County 2005]). [read post]
4 May 2020, 7:46 am by Benjamin Beaton
Certiorari is not altogether surprising, given the sharply contrasting views (and vivid language) the case elicited at the Sixth Circuit. [read post]
19 Feb 2014, 4:05 pm by INFORRM
The fact that the police officers in question had not been given sufficient information about the intelligence did not mean that they had not executed their instructions in good faith: Given the context – the possible apprehension of terrorism – Parliament must have enacted Schedule 7 in the knowledge that there might be very good reasons why the examining officers … should not be privy to the whole story. [read post]