Search for: "Law v. Cross"
Results 201 - 220
of 16,797
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
2 Mar 2007, 12:35 pm
Supreme Court; and Theodore V. [read post]
9 Sep 2014, 8:00 am
In Alexander v. [read post]
29 Jun 2016, 5:00 am
As the Court said in citing past cases, “These cases stand for the unremarkable proposition that law enforcement witnesses should be treated in the same manner as any other prosecution witness for purposes of cross-examination. [read post]
22 Feb 2019, 4:50 pm
In the battle of “piracy” v. [read post]
14 Jul 2009, 12:30 am
iStock_000000114540_1.jpg In child pornography prosecution, in the absence of any showing that the officers had a direct or personal financial interest in the result of the case, the trial court properly excluded cross-examinationthat the Sheriff's Office would receive about 25 percent of the proceeds resulting from the forfeiture of the defendant's home, in United States v. [read post]
27 Dec 2016, 10:59 am
Hernandez v. [read post]
1 Jul 2013, 11:56 am
& N.J. in 2002, Outar v City of New York in 2001/2005. [read post]
30 Mar 2015, 6:52 am
Glover v. [read post]
14 Feb 2017, 3:16 pm
The Supreme Court endorsed such a test in a case called Boumediene v. [read post]
14 Jun 2023, 4:12 am
Co-author Emily Morris * One of the questions raised in 1776 Energy Partners, LLC v. [read post]
20 Jun 2019, 2:36 pm
The post Afternoon round-up: The American Legion v. [read post]
6 Jul 2009, 8:58 pm
In the matter of Marangos v. [read post]
8 Sep 2010, 4:20 pm
On March 30, 2010, the Supreme Court announced its decision in Berghuis v. [read post]
26 May 2021, 3:08 pm
"The rule of the strong, not the rule of law": Reexamining implicit divestiture after McGirt v. [read post]
23 Mar 2015, 5:00 am
The specific evidentiary issues in this matter centered around the Plaintiff's cross-examination of the defense medical expert.Under the well-established rule of law that holds that a witness cannot be cross-examined on collateral matters, see J.S. v. [read post]
22 Feb 2023, 3:18 am
The aim of the procedural initiative is to clarify the administrative procedure that applies in cross-border investigations and enforcement under the GDPR. [read post]
Stenehjem v. Sareen: Court Finds that Pre-Litigation Demand Constitutes Extortion as a Matter of Law
23 Jun 2014, 8:00 am
In Stenehjem v. [read post]
15 Mar 2018, 1:42 pm
I recently posted a draft of a new article, Cross-Enforcement of the Fourth Amendment, forthcoming in the Harvard Law Review. [read post]
10 Aug 2017, 7:35 am
Case citation: Cross v. [read post]
22 Feb 2014, 12:23 pm
People v. [read post]