Search for: "Hill v. State"
Results 1641 - 1660
of 5,342
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
24 Apr 2007, 1:19 am
Ivy Hill Corp., 410 F.3d 1071, 1075 (9th Cir.2005). [read post]
26 Jan 2012, 4:04 pm
The court cites to US v. [read post]
17 Oct 2011, 12:15 pm
Hill; Cantrell v. [read post]
2 Nov 2010, 6:58 am
The Christian Science Monitor, The Hill, and CNN all have coverage. [read post]
3 Apr 2012, 6:29 am
Petitioners John and Irene Yee own the Friendly Hills and Sunset Terrace Mobile Home Parks, both of which are located in the city of Escondido. [read post]
16 Nov 2011, 10:45 am
United States, 11-5323, another in the group of petitions discussed last week that the Court is collecting for the November 22 Conference along with Hill v. [read post]
30 Aug 2016, 1:25 pm
Vera and Shaw v. [read post]
19 Oct 2009, 6:38 am
On October 28th, Angel Raich–my client in Gonzales v. [read post]
17 Jul 2012, 3:52 pm
In the Georgia case, which Cohen also covers, Warren Hill is facing the death penalty even though, as Cohen notes, a veteran Georgia state judge has said Hill is mentally disabled. [read post]
22 Jan 2013, 8:12 am
Forty years ago today, the Supreme Court decided Roe v. [read post]
6 Oct 2008, 6:40 pm
In United States v. [read post]
2 Jun 2008, 9:28 am
United States, 985 F.2d 1574, 1582 (Fed. [read post]
17 Feb 2017, 6:07 pm
Barbara Williams v. [read post]
17 Feb 2017, 6:07 pm
Barbara Williams v. [read post]
31 Aug 2010, 9:17 am
We have offices in Farmington Hills, Detroit, Ann Arbor, Grand Rapids and Sterling Heights to better serve you. [read post]
21 Jun 2022, 9:20 pm
Supreme Court is not taking the appeal of Edwin Hardeman v. [read post]
9 Mar 2009, 10:39 am
Like the court of appeal found in Black Hill Investments, Inc. v. [read post]
9 Jul 2018, 7:08 am
Wade and criminalize abortion care in the United States. [read post]
28 May 2021, 2:20 pm
Hill 20-1587Issues: (1) Whether a state may require convicted sex offenders to obtain and carry a state identification bearing the words “sex offender” without facially violating the First Amendment’s prohibition on compelled speech; and (2) whether a convicted sex offender has a First Amendment right not to be prosecuted for fraudulently altering a state identification card after scratching off a statutorily required sex offender designation. [read post]
28 May 2021, 2:20 pm
Hill 20-1587Issues: (1) Whether a state may require convicted sex offenders to obtain and carry a state identification bearing the words “sex offender” without facially violating the First Amendment’s prohibition on compelled speech; and (2) whether a convicted sex offender has a First Amendment right not to be prosecuted for fraudulently altering a state identification card after scratching off a statutorily required sex offender designation. [read post]
