Search for: "Jones v. Sheriff" Results 141 - 160 of 177
Sort by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
15 Feb 2010, 2:20 pm by Erin Miller
Jones Docket: 09-357 Issue: When a state court has reviewed the merits of a petitioner’s federal claim for plain error, is the decision of a federal court of appeals in a habeas corpus action that there was procedural default of that claim contrary to the decisions of this Court? [read post]
1 Feb 2010, 3:04 am by Omar Ha-Redeye
Eugene Volokh discusses religious exemptions of a different type, from mandatory autopsies for executed killers in Johnson v. [read post]
22 Oct 2009, 3:35 pm
The grandstanding sheriff of Cook County, Ill. is thrown out of court. [read post]
22 Sep 2009, 11:00 am
Accordingly, assuming, without deciding, that Senator Skelos presently has standing to sue the Governor, we now proceed to the merits (see Matter of New York State Assn. of Criminal Defense Lawyers v Kaye, 96 NY2d 512, 516 [2001]; Babigian v Wachtler, 69 NY2d 1012, 1013 [1987]; Matter of Roman Catholic Diocese of Albany v New York State Dept. of Health, 66 NY2d 948, 951 [1985]). [read post]
24 Aug 2009, 3:30 am
  The court also rejected Jones’ claim that the trial judge should have declared a mistrial because the victim caused such a ruckus outside the courtroom  that the sheriff’s deputies had to Taser him. [read post]
3 Feb 2009, 4:00 am
Jan. 22, 2009)Affirming that multiple plaintiff claims of discrimination etc were frivolous and that a plaintiff's attorney engaged in sanctionable conduct; remanded $660K+ atty fees order for more refined computation of amounts>> Noted here: Central Ohio Employment Law Update7th Circuit>> Jones v City of Springfield, No. 08-2085 (7th cir. [read post]
23 Dec 2008, 2:57 pm
Jones, No. 07-2052 Sentence is affirmed where defendant pled guilty to charges stemming from her role in a bank fraud conspiracy. [read post]
15 Dec 2008, 11:07 pm
The test was devised by Justice Stewart in United States v. [read post]
22 Nov 2008, 3:48 pm
At issue in these cases was the impact upon a capital defendant's right to effective and conflict-free representation at trial when the particular public defender assigned as counsel was a card carrying special deputy sheriff. [read post]