Search for: "People of State of New York v. Jenkins"
Results 1 - 20
of 53
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
22 Feb 2019, 7:34 am
A plaintiff alleged that her employer began discriminating against her after she began wearing her hair in an “Afro” style in Jenkins v. [read post]
17 Apr 2015, 1:53 pm
Jenkins, Plaintiff(s), v. [read post]
17 Sep 2020, 4:00 am
" * Citations to selected New York State decisions referencing "Misprision of Felony" are set out below. [read post]
17 Sep 2020, 4:00 am
" * Citations to selected New York State decisions referencing "Misprision of Felony" are set out below. [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]
7 Oct 2008, 6:20 pm
Jenkins, 4155, 4328/05, SUPREME COURT OF NEW YORK, APPELLATE DIVISION, FIRST DEPARTMENT, 2008 NY Slip Op 7180; 2008 N.Y. [read post]
7 Mar 2007, 12:27 am
ANDRIAS, J.P., FRIEDMAN, MARLOW, NARDELLI, CATTERSON, JJ. *1 (Cite ...
7.
The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v. [read post]
21 Nov 2007, 12:13 am
The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v. [read post]
12 Jan 2012, 3:55 pm
" In "over four decades on the bench, he brought greater inclusion to the New York Police Department and to construction trades that had long excluded people of color and women. [read post]
2 Aug 2007, 2:58 am
New York Stock Exchange Inc. [read post]
12 Mar 2007, 12:26 am
City of New York U.S. [read post]
1 Dec 2008, 9:05 pm
People v. [read post]
9 Nov 2009, 4:36 pm
City of New York (08-969). [read post]
21 Oct 2014, 5:27 am
New York State indictments must be based on competent evidence, meaning evidence not subject to an exclusionary rule, such as the prohibition against hearsay (Richardson, Evidence § 4, at 4 [Prince 10th ed]; see also, People v. [read post]
24 Oct 2008, 3:54 pm
New York State Elec. [read post]
17 Nov 2008, 8:32 pm
The Court held that"The threshold issue in evaluating whether a resentence is vindictive is whether the resentence is more severe than that originally imposed" (People v Cahill, 46 AD3d 1455, 1456; see generally People v Young, 94 NY2d 171, 176-177, rearg denied 94 NY2d 876; People v Van Pelt, 76 NY2d 156, 159-160), and a determinate sentence of 25 years is of course more severe than one of 20 years. [read post]
1 Sep 2023, 4:00 am
The justices faced heightened security risks, Thomas noted, after the leak of the court’s majority opinion to overturn Roe v. [read post]
