Search for: "Montgomery v. Michigan, State of" Results 1 - 20 of 83
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
22 Jun 2011, 1:38 pm by WIMS
Appealed from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, at Greenbelt. [read post]
20 May 2016, 2:07 pm by Scott Grabel
Alabama case is retroactive to all juvenile lifers (Montgomery v. [read post]
5 Feb 2016, 4:49 am by Timothy P. Flynn
Michigan, along with 5 other states, has refused to apply the Miller ruling retroactively, keeping all of their juvenile lifers locked-up.A close read of the 6-3 opinion in Montgomery shows that the SCOTUS has not only retroactively applied the juvenile lifer ban to all past state and federal sentences, it also strengthened its ruling in Miller. [read post]
1 Dec 2017, 2:15 am by NCC Staff
After the boycott ended, Parks moved to Virginia and to Michigan. [read post]
5 Jan 2016, 8:59 am by Rebecca Tushnet
Rosa & Raymond Parks Institute for Self Development v. [read post]
15 Nov 2020, 2:05 pm by Matt Cooper
Michigan: Two new federal lawsuits were filed challenging the running of the election in Michigan: Donald J. [read post]
11 Sep 2016, 4:04 am by SHG
*In the retroactivity opinion of Montgomery v. [read post]
8 Nov 2020, 8:47 pm by Matt Cooper
Many lawsuits were filed in the days around Election Day, including in the states of Arizona, Georgia, Michigan, Nevada, and Pennsylvania. [read post]
20 Sep 2016, 9:24 pm by John A. Gallagher
Branstad, Governor of The State of Iowa; Paul Lepage, Governor of the State of Maine; Susana Martinez, Governor of The State of New Mexico; Governor Phil Bryant of the State of Mississippi; and Attorney General Bill Schuette on Behalf of the People of Michigan, Plaintiffs,                                                   … [read post]
4 Jan 2016, 1:52 pm by Eugene Volokh
Finally, though the 11th Circuit’s opinion focuses on Michigan law, it should be influential in other states and circuits, too. [read post]
19 Mar 2023, 1:30 pm by Will Baude
For instance, it might be that the state law issue is intertwined with the federal law issue (i.e. it is not "independent") as in Michigan v. [read post]