Search for: "HUNTLEY v. STATE" Results 1 - 20 of 46
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
16 Mar 2009, 3:14 am
High Court (Chancery Division) Tann v Herrington [2009] EWHC 445 (Ch) (10 March 2009) High Court (Queen’s Bench) Huntley v Simmonds [2009] EWHC 406 (QB) (05 March 2009) Al Jedda v Secretary of State for Defence [2009] EWHC 397 (QB) (05 March 2009) Huntley v Simmonds [2009] EWHC 405 (QB) (13 February 2009) High Court (Family Division) K v K [2008] EWHC [...] [read post]
8 Apr 2015, 11:47 am by Stephen Bilkis
Page 1 2009 NY Slip Op 51445(U) THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK v. [read post]
9 Feb 2010, 3:52 am by sally
Court of Appeal (Criminal Division) Curtis v R [2010] EWCA Crim 123 (09 February 2010) Court of Appeal (Civil Division) O’Beirne v Hudson [2010] EWCA Civ 52 (09 February 2010) Drew v Whitbread [2010] EWCA Civ 53 (09 February 2010) B, R (on the application of) v Cornwall Council & Anor [2010] EWCA Civ 55 (09 February 2010) W (Children), Re [2010] EWCA Civ 57 (09 February 2010) Eli Lilly & Co v Human Genome Sciences Inc [2010] EWCA Civ 33 (09 February… [read post]
31 Dec 2013, 4:33 am by Charles Sartain
This doctrine was most recently set forth in twin decisions of the Pennsylvania Supreme Court in 2009: Huntley & Huntley, Inc. v. [read post]
9 Apr 2015, 12:14 pm by Stephen Bilkis
The practice in the New York City Criminal Court in the vast majority of cases which involve a complaining witness who has provided information to a deponent of a misdemeanor complaint is for the District Attorney's office to file a one page boilerplate supporting deposition that states that the complaining witness has read the facts contained in the accusatory instrument and that they are true. [read post]
7 Mar 2010, 4:00 pm by James Eckert
Therefore, in my view, this would unduly burden the defendant's federal and state constitutional rights, which prohibit the use of truly involuntarily obtained statements, by requiring the defendant to forfeit state statutory rights in order to protect constitutional ones. [read post]
21 Oct 2014, 5:27 am by Lawrence Kasperek
At the Huntley hearing you get the interrogator’s grand jury testimony.Now the fun starts. [read post]
22 Mar 2010, 1:10 pm by Sheldon Toplitt
DA 09-0570 92009-0570; 2010 MT 55) relied on Article V, Sec. 8 of Montana's Constitution, which states in relevant part: "[a legislator] shall not be questioned in any other place for any speech or debate in the legislature." [read post]