Search for: "PRECISION STANDARD V US"
Results 1701 - 1720
of 4,554
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
30 Oct 2011, 7:04 am
In fact, this was precisely the defendant’s claim in the seminal ineffective assistance case, Strickland v. [read post]
21 Jun 2019, 9:04 am
P. v. [read post]
25 Jul 2010, 2:26 pm
” Miller v. [read post]
17 Aug 2018, 9:29 am
See id. at 39 n.6 (quoting California v. [read post]
14 Jun 2019, 11:01 am
Gordon drew on Baker v. [read post]
16 Mar 2024, 4:05 pm
Barrett v. [read post]
6 Oct 2014, 5:50 am
Granting Roy's motion would therefore be the equivalent of granting a motion for a new trial, and so . . . the standard for granting . . . a new trial motion also applies to Roy's mistrial motion. [read post]
8 Apr 2009, 10:38 am
Ferron v. [read post]
2 May 2021, 12:58 pm
ShareOn Thursday, the Supreme Court issued a 6-3 decision in Niz-Chavez v. [read post]
5 May 2013, 7:17 am
NYT v. [read post]
20 Feb 2019, 9:20 am
It is hardly a precise standard, and it may often be hard to tell whether a forfeiture is "grossly disproportionate" or not. [read post]
11 Aug 2015, 11:16 am
It would be error for this Court to strike down the precise language of the Act as written. [read post]
23 Apr 2016, 4:30 pm
Estonia and MTE v. [read post]
8 Dec 2021, 9:36 am
Services, Inc. v. [read post]
24 May 2010, 6:56 am
Buetow v. [read post]
4 Dec 2023, 7:41 am
In this post, Phil Woodfield and Elizabeth Lombardo of CMS comment on the Supreme Court’s decision in Canada Square Operations Ltd v Potter [2023] UKSC 41, which was handed down on 15 November 2023. [read post]
12 Apr 2019, 1:43 pm
YSL v. [read post]
19 Aug 2010, 1:50 pm
Remember what Wyeth v. [read post]
8 Mar 2007, 2:38 am
Chastain, Nesius v. [read post]
20 Sep 2014, 1:06 pm
The concept and use of surveillance in and as law was useful as a framework for introducing students to several aspects of law that have emerged in the last half century. [read post]
