Search for: "People v. Jackson" Results 1721 - 1740 of 2,479
Sort by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
25 Jun 2012, 8:29 am by familoo
Most people appreciate the enormous strains on the MoJ and court service to save money and that the premises in Wells St must be expensive. [read post]
25 Jun 2012, 8:27 am by Steve Hall
Miller and Jackson are among 79 people serving life- without-parole sentences for crimes committed at age 13 or 14, according to their lawyers. [read post]
25 Jun 2012, 3:49 am by Russ Bensing
  Effective September 30, 2011, a misdemeanor drug offense no longer creates a disability, but it doesn’t do Jackson any good, the 1st District decides, because he was convicted and sentenced before that… In State v. [read post]
18 Jun 2012, 2:50 pm by Eugene Volokh
” “I won’t go back home and explain to my people that I supported this,” he said. [read post]
18 Jun 2012, 2:44 am by Charon QC
Obiter J considers the complex case of A Local Authority v E [2012] Court of Protection ~ Anorexic patient ~ Capacity to refuse treatment “We only live once – we are born once and we die once – and the difference between life and death is the biggest difference we know” – Peter Jackson J   In the Court of Protection, Peter Jackson J has given judgment in A Local Authority v E [2012] EWHC 1639 (COP). [read post]
8 Jun 2012, 11:00 am
As I thought about the question of whether we should put more poor people into owner-occupied houses, or instead move more non-poor people out of owner-occupied houses, it suddenly struck me that we might be looking at another example of the "leveling up or leveling down" question.That question was most famously raised in the Supreme Court's 1971 Palmer v. [read post]
2 Jun 2012, 6:24 am by Max Kennerly, Esq.
  The Sheika case recounts the three major opinions I know of on the subject: People v. [read post]
27 May 2012, 7:42 am by Jeff Gamso
Which would seem to put the decisions of the federal courts pretty clearly into the controlling power of the Supremacy Clause.That's regardless of whether Andy Jackson ever really said, in response to the Court's declaration in Worcester v. [read post]