Search for: "Com. v. Davis, S."
Results 1 - 20
of 132
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
22 Mar 2018, 1:02 pm
Com. on Judiciary, Analysis of Assem. [read post]
30 Oct 2011, 5:04 am
On 19 October 2011, the Supreme Court (Lord Hope, Lord Walker, Lord Mance, Lord Clarke and Lord Wilson) released its decision in the joined cases of R (Davies & Anor) v The Commissioners for Her Majesty’s Revenue & Customs and R (Gaines-Cooper) v The Commissioners for Her Majesty’s Revenue & Customs [2011] UKSC 47. [read post]
19 Mar 2015, 2:23 pm
Ryan Davis of Law360.com reports that "Fed. [read post]
28 Jun 2021, 1:07 pm
Such massive human trafficking stings can result in dozens of arrests, not just 3 as in the case of the V-Live Gentleman’s Club. [read post]
20 Aug 2009, 2:45 am
Here’s one more quote, from one more judge, that seems appropriate; Harry Blackmun’s 1994 dissent in Callins v. [read post]
12 Oct 2011, 3:37 am
District Court to hold a hearing to determine whether new evidence “that could not have been obtained at the time of trial clearly establishes [Davis's] innocence. [read post]
29 Aug 2022, 9:05 pm
This Update focuses on the Federal Trade Commission’s (“FTC”) and the Department of Justice Antitrust Division’s (“DOJ”) antitrust enforcement activity over the last year under this Executive Order’s direction.2 For further details on the Executive Order, please see Davis Polk’s prior Client Update regarding issuance of the Executive Order.3 FTC and DOJ have been conducting intensive merger and conduct… [read post]
21 Aug 2009, 3:41 am
You can get a copy of the National Innocence Project’s amicus brief in Melendez-Diaz v. [read post]
5 Sep 2012, 3:41 am
That’s the situation presented by State v. [read post]
6 Oct 2009, 3:15 am
A defendant’s mouth also lands him in trouble in State v. [read post]
10 Jun 2011, 5:06 am
Davis appealed, and here’s where things got funky. [read post]
6 Dec 2010, 5:37 am
And there’s an interesting twist to Pepper v. [read post]
2 Dec 2010, 4:30 am
(No argument was made about the 911 calls themselves, since they were clearly non-testimonial under the “emergency” doctrine of Davis v. [read post]
9 Mar 2011, 5:17 am
The basis for that conclusion was Davis v. [read post]
23 Jan 2022, 2:03 pm
(See Pate v. [read post]
11 May 2009, 3:47 am
The 6th District’s decision in Gore v. [read post]
24 Jun 2011, 3:49 am
Crawford was unanimous (although two justices concurred only in judgment), and the next decision in that line, Davis v. [read post]
