Search for: "Matter of Wilson v Marcus"
Results 1 - 20
of 35
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
29 Jul 2010, 1:33 pm
The majority, written by Carnes and joined by Dubina, Black, Hull, Marcus, Wilson and Pryor, found the variance substantively unreasonable. [read post]
21 Aug 2009, 7:49 am
Judge Marcus wrote that the Court was bound by United States v. [read post]
20 Mar 2019, 12:30 pm
” Carducci v. [read post]
21 Mar 2019, 7:48 am
Affairs v. [read post]
5 Mar 2012, 2:11 am
In the Matter of S (a child), heard 20 February 2012. [read post]
1 Jan 2022, 12:23 pm
Marcus and Wilson’s frequent discussion of historical context, however, helped guard against this. [read post]
30 Jul 2010, 8:31 am
Wilson, joined by Senior Judge Emmett Ripley Cox, revised some aspects of the portion of the majority opinion dealing with the sexual harassment claims.In the July opinion, Wilson had emphasized that many of the instances of which the plaintiffs complained were not sexual in nature. [read post]
15 Feb 2024, 9:22 am
(Accent Delight), an offshore company with Dmitry Rybolovlev as the ultimate beneficial owner, v. [read post]
15 Jan 2010, 10:11 am
Practically speaking, however, the source code coalition has prepared matters to point where it requires little effort from attorneys to take advantage of this issue. [read post]
12 Feb 2010, 11:50 am
Allen, Jacob Hazelton, Douglas V. [read post]
7 Jul 2008, 5:11 pm
NANCY WILSON BRISCOE, JUDITH BROCK SEITZ, AND CAROLYN ROGERS, UPLAND RESOURCES, INC., KCS RESOURCES, INC., GREAT LAKES ENERGY PARTNERS, L.L.C. [read post]
11 Mar 2020, 3:03 pm
Debbie Bujnoch, Secretary to Marcus F. [read post]
1 Nov 2020, 4:35 pm
In Clarke v Nursing and Midwifery Council of New South Wales [2020] NSWDC 641 Scotting DCJ dismissed claims for libel based on an email and other matters. [read post]
1 Sep 2007, 8:09 am
Marcus Franklin ("Franklin") and Jamaal Clarke ("Clarke") were convicted of various bank robbery charges in 2003. [read post]
19 Aug 2008, 8:28 pm
Marcus, No. 07-4005 Conviction and sentence for violation of sex trafficking statute, the forced labor statute, and the Trafficking Victims Protection Act (TVPA) is vacated and the matter is remanded where: 1) district court committed plain error in failing to instruct the jury with respect to the date of the enactment of TVPA; and 2) the application of the TVPA in such a manner constituted an Ex Post Facto Clause violation, and the conviction must be vacated under applicable… [read post]
10 Aug 2011, 7:35 am
A fifth indictment, United States v. [read post]
10 Aug 2011, 7:35 am
A fifth indictment, United States v. [read post]
10 Aug 2011, 7:35 am
A fifth indictment, United States v. [read post]
10 Aug 2011, 7:35 am
A fifth indictment, United States v. [read post]
23 Sep 2009, 8:57 am
Marcus Issue: Whether the court of appeals departed from the Court’s interpretation of Rule 52(b) of the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure by adopting as the appropriate standard for plain-error review of an asserted ex post facto violation whether "there is any possibility, no matter how unlikely, that the jury could have convicted based exclusively on pre-enactment conduct. [read post]
