Search for: "In re D.S., Juvenile"
Results 1 - 11
of 11
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
4 Oct 2019, 9:30 am
Juvenile law — Sufficiency of the evidence — Child abuse The Circuit Court for Wicomico County, sitting as a juvenile court, found D.S., appellant, involved in the delinquent acts of second-degree child abuse, second-degree assault, reckless endangerment, and neglect of a minor, following the death of D.S. [read post]
26 Apr 2012, 12:48 pm
Juvenile Crimes in West Palm Beach and Fort LauderdaleArrested for Possession of Marijuana in Fort Lauderdale? [read post]
12 Aug 2019, 7:52 am
In re D.S., 2016-Ohio-1027 (It is not a due process violation to impose upon a juvenile registration and notification requirements that extend beyond the age of 18 or 21.) [read post]
14 Jun 2014, 2:29 pm
In re D.S. [read post]
3 Jan 2019, 7:35 am
In re D.S., 2016-Ohio-1027 (It is not a due process violation to impose upon juvenile registration and notification requirements that extend beyond the age of 18 or 21.) [read post]
17 Jan 2019, 11:06 am
In re D.S., 2016-Ohio-1027 (It is not a due process violation to impose upon juvenile registration and notification requirements that extend beyond the age of 18 or 21.) [read post]
28 Nov 2014, 6:50 am
But as with so many things in life, it’s fine when they do so because they’re right and you’re wrong. [read post]
2 Oct 2017, 7:08 am
”) In re D.S., 2016-Ohio-7369 (Kennedy, J., concurring in the judgment) (In a prior juvenile case involving a juvenile’s admission of guilt, Justice Kennedy applied criminal plain-error to a mutual mistake of law, which caused a “manifest injustice,” without considering whether this error was outcome determinative.) [read post]
22 May 2012, 3:32 am
So the 8th District’s decision last week in In re D.S., dismissing a juvenile conviction for murder and felonious assault on speedy trial grounds, was all the more surprising, since the defense had never responded to the discovery demand at all. [read post]
22 Feb 2009, 4:25 pm
" In re D.S. (2008-1624) PropLaw I: The application of SB 10 to persons who committed their offenses prior to the enactment of SB 10 violates the Ex Post Facto Clause of the United States Constitution. [read post]
8 Dec 2021, 7:28 am
In re D.S., 364 N.C. 184, 193–94 (2010) (holding that noncompliance with 15-day deadline, plus 15-day extension, for filing of juvenile delinquency petition following submission of complaint did not deprive court of jurisdiction; court relies on decisions holding that a statute’s use of term “shall” for time in which to act may be directory, not mandatory). [read post]
