Search for: "Doe v. Blake"
Results 1 - 20
of 564
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
14 Oct 2008, 6:41 pm
Oregon v. [read post]
9 Jan 2007, 9:28 am
New Jersey but before Blakely v. [read post]
4 Aug 2006, 8:40 am
As such, Appellate Rule 7(B) does not implicate Blakely. [read post]
13 Oct 2006, 12:46 pm
The Court of Appeals has decided another Blakely belated appeal: Baysinger v. [read post]
23 Dec 2007, 12:23 pm
It can create a host of problems.In Blake v. [read post]
4 Dec 2004, 9:47 am
Krebs v. [read post]
16 Dec 2009, 7:36 am
 Because the courts have not treated Blakely or United States v. [read post]
12 Jul 2007, 9:59 am
State that Blakely, and not its predecessor Apprendi v. [read post]
30 Sep 2004, 10:14 am
There are bookmarks in the PDF file, so that if the file is opened with Acrobat, a list of the included documents appears.The one document I have left out is the July 16, 2004, report of the National Center for State Courts: Blakely v. [read post]
3 May 2023, 9:30 am
“I’d learn about the categorical imperative and think, ‘Well, what else does Kant say? [read post]
30 Oct 2006, 3:26 pm
New Jersey, 530 U.S. 466 (2000), and Blakely v. [read post]
30 Jan 2024, 1:08 pm
” [55] In Blake v Fox [2023] EWCA Civ 1000, the Court of Appeal dismissed an appeal against Justice Nicklin’s meaning judgment for five out of six tweets. [read post]
22 Aug 2006, 6:25 pm
Osborne (available here), the Court held that the plain-error standard of review does not apply to Blakely errors that occurred in pre-Blakely trials; in other words, Blakely was decided while the case was on direct appeal. [read post]
26 Mar 2007, 6:08 pm
John Pinnow does the first 17 minutes or so about Blakely. [read post]
9 Oct 2023, 4:18 pm
On 25 August 2023, the Court of Appeal Nicola Davies, Arnold and Warby LJJ) handed down judgment in Blake & ors v Fox [2023] EWCA Civ 1000. [read post]
3 Sep 2004, 1:53 pm
This rule does not apply to the present case. [read post]
4 Dec 2006, 11:13 am
Here is the abstract: In the 2004 case of Blakely v. [read post]
20 Jun 2007, 11:59 am
June 20, 2007), also decided today, Blakely does not apply to a Post-Conviction Rule 2 belated appeal challenging a pre-Blakely sentence. [read post]
10 Nov 2009, 9:12 am
Nov. 10, 2009) (available here), in which the panel concludes that Michigan's distinctive structured sentencing scheme does not have a Blakely problem. [read post]
24 Jun 2008, 8:02 pm
The Tennessee Supreme Court today in State v. [read post]
