Search for: "DeLeon v. State"
Results 21 - 40
of 82
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
18 Dec 2014, 7:08 am
Deleon, 13-1516, which likely got its eighth relist since the record arrived. [read post]
9 Dec 2014, 2:00 pm
Premo v. [read post]
4 Dec 2014, 11:05 am
Deleon, 13-1516, about whether it is an “adverse employment action” or a “materially adverse action” when an employer grants an employee’s request for a job transfer that he winds up disliking, and Brumfield v. [read post]
3 Dec 2014, 7:23 am
In re Ryan 14-375Issue: Whether this Court should issue a writ of mandamus and/or prohibition ordering the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit to issue the mandate in Henry v. [read post]
20 Nov 2014, 5:00 am
Ryan v. [read post]
19 Nov 2014, 12:58 pm
Deleon, 13-1516 also racked up relist number five (since the record was requested). [read post]
14 Nov 2014, 5:42 am
Farina, 13-1227, a state-on-top habeas case involving how much leeway a federal court is allowed in determining that a state court made an unreasonable factual determination; and Whitman v. [read post]
11 Nov 2014, 9:15 am
Teo v. [read post]
6 Nov 2014, 10:59 am
Deleon, 13-1516. [read post]
4 Nov 2014, 1:30 pm
§ 2254(d)(1), that where a state appellate court concludes certain pretrial statements should have been excluded from the prosecution’s case under Miranda v. [read post]
28 Oct 2014, 1:30 pm
United States ex rel. [read post]
24 Oct 2014, 9:11 am
United States, 14-5227, and Freidus v. [read post]
16 Oct 2014, 7:57 am
United States, 14-29, involving a prosecution under §10(b) of the Securities Exchange Act, or the ’34 Act, as we old-timers call it (rescheduled for this Friday’s Conference); and Crews v. [read post]
16 Oct 2014, 7:10 am
Scott v. [read post]
8 Oct 2014, 9:00 am
Khan v. [read post]
25 Sep 2014, 3:25 pm
The Texas case, Deleon v. [read post]
10 Sep 2014, 9:00 am
Arizona State Legislature v. [read post]
8 Aug 2014, 6:05 pm
As we know, under the due process clauses of the New York State Constitution, Article I, § 6, and the United States Constitution, Fourteenth Amendment, evidence of a pretrial identification of the defendant is inadmissible if the procedure used is “unnecessarily suggestive” (Neil v Biggers, 409 US 188 [1972]; People v Adams, 53 NY2d 241 [1981]; People v Owens, 74 NY2d 677 [1989]; People v Farraro, 144 AD2d 976 [4th Dept 1988]). [read post]
