Search for: "Matter of Martinez v Torres"
Results 1 - 11
of 11
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
26 Jul 2023, 1:45 pm
Torres-Martinez Desert Cahuilla Indians (Indian Civil Rights Act; Tribal Sovereign Immunity) Saginaw Chippewa Indian Tribe of Michigan v. [read post]
16 Sep 2013, 4:19 pm
However, as the trial court properly observed, the defense counsel opened the door to this challenged testimony like in the cases of People v Torres, People v Martinez, People v Ocean and People v Koury. [read post]
14 Feb 2012, 7:30 pm
Defendants Hanna and Ransfer moved to suppress that evidence, but Magistrate Judge Edwin Torres denied the motion for lack of standing: In United States v. [read post]
30 Jan 2011, 11:45 pm
The Court further ruled that Almendarez-Torres v. [read post]
7 Jul 2008, 5:11 pm
MARTIN, DROUGHT AND TORRES, INC., ET AL.; from Bexar County; 4th district (04-07-00342-CV, ___ SW3d ___, 10-31-07) as reinstated08-0266LEE, WAI-LING v. [read post]
26 Oct 2012, 10:09 am
The state Supreme Court will decide which offer shifts costs when it resolves the split between Martinez v. [read post]
2 Sep 2008, 5:10 pm
U.S. 9th Circuit Court of Appeals, August 26, 2008 Torres v. [read post]
1 Nov 2011, 8:48 am
And Torres-Alfaro v. [read post]
15 Sep 2008, 8:29 pm
Torres, No. 072331 Sentence of 188 to 235 months for possession of crack cocaine with intent to distribute is affirmed where: 1) the court did not abuse its discretion in counting both the state drug offense and the state gun offense as contributing to defendant's status as a career offender; 2) the district court was correct in finding the state gun conviction to be a "crime of violence" for career-offender purposes; and 3) district court was compelled to assign defendant,… [read post]
13 May 2008, 1:35 pm
Genao-Sanchez, No. 05-1402 Sentence for drug conspiracy, conspiring to use a firearm in furtherance of a drug conspiracy, and aiding and abetting the commission of a crime, is vacated and remanded where: 1) the district court's failure to convene a new sentencing hearing deprived defendant the opportunity to argue his position both as to matters of fact relevant to sentencing, and as to the appropriate sentence to be imposed; and 2) thus, the error was prejudicial. [read post]
11 Oct 2009, 3:47 pm
There is no single book that covers the subject matter in full detail. [read post]
