Search for: "Graham v. People" Results 1 - 20 of 637
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
27 Feb 2014, 6:29 am by Matthew L.M. Fletcher
Kristen Carpenter and Lorie Graham have posted a very compelling and powerful paper about the Supreme Court’s decision in Adoptive Couple v. [read post]
29 Apr 2013, 11:01 am by John Pfaff
Adam Liptak has a depressing piece up in today's New York Times about how states are respodning to the Supreme Court's decision in Graham v Florida, which declared life without parole sentences for minors unconstitutional. [read post]
22 Mar 2011, 5:15 pm by Brian Shiffrin
However, review of the constitutionality of New York's Persistent Felony Offender sentencing law is still being sought in the certiorari petition filed on March 10, 2011 in the direct appeal in People v Battles [read post]
27 Jul 2010, 7:56 am by christopher
448 F.3d 605 (2006) BILL GRAHAM ARCHIVES, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. [read post]
17 May 2010, 3:56 pm by Kent Scheidegger
The NYT's "Room for Debate" feature has a short piece by yours truly on Graham v. [read post]
6 Jun 2016, 6:23 am by Jeff Welty
The en banc opinion in Graham adopts the same basic rule that the North Carolina Court of Appeals adopted in State v. [read post]
6 Jun 2016, 6:23 am by Jeff Welty
The en banc opinion in Graham adopts the same basic rule that the North Carolina Court of Appeals adopted in State v. [read post]
29 Sep 2009, 2:24 pm
I mention this one if only because the concurrence written by Justice Graham -- a retired judge from Marin sitting by designation -- seems particular timely in light of current events.Justice Graham writes separately solely to write three pages excoriating prior authority that uses the term "voluntary" to describe non-forced sexual interaction between a minor and an adult. [read post]
17 May 2010, 11:41 am by Steve Hall
Supreme Court today issued an historic ruling in Graham v. [read post]
14 Jun 2020, 12:26 pm by Marty Lederman
  Likewise, although Graham announced that the subpoenas are necessary because "[t]he American people deserve answers to these questions" about "why all these counterintelligence investigations were opened to begin with" and "how these investigations got off the rails," a recent Office of Legal Counsel opinion insists that "transmitting information “to inform the public . . . is not a part of the legislative function. [read post]
9 Nov 2013, 8:26 am by stu@crimapp.com
The Michigan Supreme Court just granted permission to appeal on People v Carp and People v Eliason. [read post]