Search for: "Goldstein v. United States"
Results 221 - 240
of 1,060
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
14 May 2015, 7:16 pm
United States 14-740Disclosure: Goldstein & Russell, P.C., whose attorneys contribute to this blog in various capacities, is counsel to the petitioner in this case.Issue: Whether the good faith exception to the exclusionary rule applies to a search warrant that is itself the fruit of the poisonous tree. [read post]
15 Jan 2015, 9:57 am
Our policy is to include and disclose all cases in which Goldstein & Russell, P.C., whose attorneys contribute to this blog in various capacities, represents either a party or an amicus in the case, with the exception of the rare cases in which Goldstein & Russell represents the respondent(s) but does not appear on the briefs in the case. [read post]
4 Sep 2020, 7:11 am
The first argument, in Jones v. [read post]
25 Apr 2011, 6:06 am
” Elsewhere in the Post, Barnes also has coverage of the government’s recent cert. petition in United States v. [read post]
4 Nov 2008, 5:00 am
At 11 a.m., the Court will hear argument in United States v. [read post]
19 May 2010, 7:11 am
Florida and United States v. [read post]
28 Jun 2013, 8:08 am
Briefly: At PrawfsBlawg, Will Baude covers United States v. [read post]
6 Jul 2012, 8:58 am
Journal of the Supreme Court of the United States The Journal of the Supreme Court of the United States contains the “official minutes” of the Court. [read post]
17 Apr 2018, 4:19 am
United States and Hughes v. [read post]
17 Jan 2014, 5:55 am
United States. [read post]
18 Feb 2011, 1:38 am
(2) Does Section 514 of the Uruguay Round Agreements Act violate the First Amendment of the United States Constitution? [read post]
26 Jun 2010, 7:12 am
United States, Black v. [read post]
22 Apr 2016, 7:57 am
Monday’s oral argument in United States v. [read post]
21 May 2013, 7:49 am
Disclosures: Goldstein & Russell, P.C., whose attorneys work for or contribute to this blog in various capacities, served as co-counsel to the petitioners in City of Arlington v. [read post]
19 May 2007, 2:17 am
Our explanation of the New Deal transformation is that the public kept reelecting Franklin Roosevelt to the White House and Democrats to the Senate, so that Roosevelt was able to replace eight Justices by the time the Court decided United States v. [read post]
8 Dec 2015, 7:22 pm
Katyal quickly pointed out that Goldstein had used a line from Nevada v. [read post]
17 Jun 2014, 7:15 am
United States v. [read post]
3 Jul 2010, 4:01 pm
United States. [read post]
12 Jun 2015, 9:29 am
For the first time since this crusty old man was on the bar mitzvah circuit, the United States has a Triple Crown winner. [read post]
17 Jun 2011, 11:41 am
United States, Smith v. [read post]
