Search for: "Blake v. State"
Results 421 - 440
of 925
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
12 May 2016, 11:41 am
See State v. [read post]
27 Dec 2016, 4:55 am
Briefly: In The New York Times, Adam Liptak looks at Mickelson v. [read post]
17 Nov 2011, 3:35 am
The first is a Blakely v. [read post]
20 Jun 2016, 6:19 pm
Filburn, Lopez, and United States v. [read post]
13 Feb 2018, 11:20 am
"Well, we can start with the Supreme Court of the United States: see, e.g., Thompson v. [read post]
26 Jul 2016, 7:05 am
Blake, 136 S. [read post]
21 Apr 2010, 4:32 am
Abelson, 398 S.E.2d 557 (Ga. 1990); Blake v. [read post]
22 May 2011, 12:04 am
Thus the decision in Siderman de Blake v. [read post]
23 May 2007, 3:43 pm
At Volokh Conspiracy, Eugene Volokh has this post discussing the Louisiana Supremre Court's decision in State v. [read post]
18 Aug 2013, 7:22 pm
” United States v. [read post]
31 Mar 2010, 10:49 am
He was one of the winning attorneys in the consolidated decisions in Besser v Walsh, _F3d_ [2d Cir 3/31/10]) in which the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit struck down New York's persistent felony offender law as unconstitutional, holding that “the New York courts’ upholding of the constitutionality of the New York state persistent felony offender statute after the United States Supreme Court’s decision in… [read post]
18 Aug 2016, 8:37 am
Blake, decided June 6, 2016 (107 lower court citations)... 3) Mullenix v. [read post]
5 Oct 2007, 7:04 am
An intriguing little opinion today from the Sixth Circuit in US v. [read post]
4 Apr 2019, 6:23 am
Blake v. [read post]
14 Feb 2010, 6:25 am
The court held that plaintiff was collaterally estopped by a prior state court decision rejecting the same request under RLUIPA.In Mangus v. [read post]
31 Jul 2008, 4:39 am
In a decision issued yesterday in Stallings v. [read post]
29 Jan 2016, 4:14 pm
United States — Retroactivity of the Supreme Court’s decision in Johnson v. [read post]
30 Apr 2009, 7:50 am
/**/ In United States v. [read post]
14 Dec 2011, 8:39 am
In People v Nappo (94 NY2d 564 [2000]), we held that the State was not the “owner” of uncollected taxes within the meaning of the statutory definition of the term because “taxes due were not the property of the State prior to their remittance” (id. at 566). [read post]
15 Mar 2011, 10:10 am
State Bank, 87 N.J. 163, 176 (1981), citing Gellert v. [read post]
