Search for: "People v. Render"
Results 141 - 160
of 5,228
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
11 Sep 2013, 8:23 pm
Affirming the Third Department’s holding, the Court of Appeals held that “this case is not akin to Guzman where the prospective juror confirmed that a sign language interpreter would allow him to follow the proceedings verbatim,” since in Guay, no alternative accommodations were requested or discussed (People v Guay, 18 NY3d 16, 23 [2011]).Along these lines, the Fourth Department noted that “[i]t is well established that ‘[a] juror who has not… [read post]
4 Oct 2009, 5:14 pm
Defendant had the burden of establishing that he had a legitimate expectation of privacy in the hotel room that was searched by the police (see People v Ramirez-Portoreal, 88 NY2d 99, 108), and he failed to meet that burden. [read post]
15 Jan 2020, 10:45 am
Washington, 466 U.S. 668 (1984); another based on Cuyler v. [read post]
15 Jun 2013, 2:24 pm
In McRoberts v. [read post]
16 May 2012, 12:51 pm
Physical Therapy v. [read post]
8 Jan 2011, 1:07 pm
Clifford and Tyler on fire scene searches do not distinguish between protection of people and property. [read post]
17 Apr 2009, 11:27 am
Van Horn v. [read post]
9 Jul 2013, 2:02 pm
Johnson and People v. [read post]
29 Aug 2013, 12:17 pm
In the People v Asmar the prosecution sought permission to adduce evidence about the defendant’s past with the complainant. [read post]
10 May 2012, 7:20 am
In Henderson v. [read post]
9 Nov 2018, 12:04 am
Kit Chong Ng and Mubarak Waseem Source: M People, Moving on Up music video. [read post]
30 Jul 2009, 9:17 am
Background In 1983, a jury convicted Frank Spisak of murdering three people. [read post]
5 Nov 2020, 1:17 pm
The individual plaintiffs in California v. [read post]
25 Feb 2016, 5:46 am
People fear crime. [read post]
2 Aug 2013, 3:47 pm
Hines, People v. [read post]
29 Oct 2018, 8:33 am
Mikisew’s iteration of this principle renders it uncertain whether the Province did indeed have a legal obligation to consult the public in introducing Bill 4. [read post]
8 Feb 2012, 7:54 am
Co. v.. [read post]
6 Jan 2014, 1:28 pm
Indeed, standing alone, the documents shed no light on defendant's guilt or innocence as ruled in People v Damato and People v Bush. [read post]
4 Feb 2011, 10:15 am
In People v. [read post]
6 Nov 2020, 12:18 pm
There's simply no reason at all to think that the 2017 Congress believed that anyone (no reasonable person, anyway) would purchase unwanted insurance because of a "sense of legal obligation" engendered by the 2017 statutory amendment.But even if there were some such unreasonable people out there (such as, perhaps, the individual plaintiffs in the case) who mistakenly read the amended Section 5000A to require them to purchase insurance, those… [read post]
