Search for: "Edwards v State" Results 1681 - 1700 of 4,363
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
7 Mar 2013, 7:15 am by Cormac Early
Again at the Volokh Conspiracy, Nick Rosencranz responds to arguments in the amicus brief filed by Dale Carpenter and others in United States v. [read post]
24 Mar 2015, 4:23 am by Amy Howe
And at ISCOTUSnow, Edward Lee predicts the winners in yesterday’s oral arguments based on the number of questions for each side. [read post]
12 Jan 2011, 10:48 am by Steve Hall
The Court of Criminal Appeals opinion in Lykos v. [read post]
27 May 2010, 8:20 am by Meg Martin
If you need assistance using the Universal Citation format, please contact the Wyoming State Law Library.] [read post]
23 Jan 2010, 1:25 pm by Terry Lenamon
Combine the expansion of the right with the fact that the right to counsel begins the minute that an individual invokes that right, Edwards v. [read post]
13 Jan 2008, 4:47 pm
Defendant-Appellant James Edward Klups ("Klups") contests on appeal his sentence to a sixty-month prison term for travel with the intent to engage in criminal sexual activity, in violation of 18 U.S.C. [read post]
25 Apr 2014, 4:20 am by Amy Howe
At the IIT Chicago-Kent Faculty Blog, Edward Lee analyzes Tuesday’s argument in the Internet TV case ABC v. [read post]
8 Nov 2013, 4:26 pm by Berniard Law Firm
In the recent case decided by the Louisiana Supreme Court, Edward Morrison v. [read post]
12 Nov 2022, 7:12 am by Harrece Gassery
Edwards in his official capacity as Governor of the State of Louisiana, and the State of Louisiana, involves a popular New Orleans restaurant, known as Oceana Grill, which requested the trial court declare Business Interruption coverage existed under their policy. [read post]
2 Jul 2021, 2:00 am by Matrix Legal Support Service
He is also incorrect to suggest that it makes any difference whether an appellate court, when rejecting an Edwards v Bairstow challenge, expresses its agreement with the conclusion of the fact-finding tribunal or states only that the tribunal was entitled to reach that conclusion on the material before it. [read post]