Search for: "Fields v. State" Results 141 - 160 of 11,709
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
12 May 2021, 5:47 am by Daily Record Staff
Criminal procedure — Motion to suppress evidence — Involuntary field sobriety test A jury in the Circuit Court for Charles County convicted appellant, Michael Maurice Ford, of grossly negligent manslaughter by vehicle, negligent homicide by vehicle while under the influence of alcohol per se, and related offenses. [read post]
14 Feb 2015, 12:43 pm by Evan M. Levow
The New Jersey Superior Court, Appellate Division ruled in State v. [read post]
1 Jun 2011, 5:08 am by Evidence ProfBlogger
Last month, I posted an entry about Wisconsin becoming the 31st state to adopt or apply the Daubert standard to determine whether to admit a witness to testify as an expert in a given field. [read post]
15 Dec 2017, 12:13 pm by Zarine Kharazian
Sign up for our mailing list: Leave this field empty if you're human: The post A Look at the European Commission’s Amicus Brief in United States v. [read post]
15 Dec 2017, 12:13 pm by Zarine Kharazian
Sign up for our mailing list: Leave this field empty if you're human: The post A Look at the European Commission’s Amicus Brief in United States v. [read post]
25 Jul 2014, 1:20 pm by Ryan Scoville
Professor O’Hear has already offered a helpful analysis on that holding and its implications for the field of criminal law. [read post]
26 Nov 2010, 3:18 pm by Anna Christensen
On December 1, in Virginia Office for Protection and Advocacy v. [read post]
14 Mar 2011, 3:44 am by traceydennis
Casteels v British Airways plc (Case C-379/09); [2011] WLR (D) 85 “Article 48FEU of the FEU Treaty, concerning the adoption of measures in the field of social security, could not be relied on by an individual against his private sector employer in a dispute before a national court. [read post]
1 Jul 2010, 5:27 pm
If you read only one Complaint this year, please make it the one that kicked off Harms v. [read post]
29 Feb 2012, 11:19 am by Maureen Cosgrove
[SCOTUSblog backgrounder] that the federal Locomotive Inspection Act (LIA) [49 USC § 20701] preempts state-law design-defect and failure-to-warn claims because these claims fall within the field of locomotive equipment regulation preempted by the act. [read post]