Search for: "People v. Aguilar" Results 1 - 20 of 78
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
27 Oct 2016, 11:57 am
This is a lengthy, published opinion that exclusively involves whether it really costs $475 -- the amount of the restitution order at issue -- to paint over a profane, 80 foot long, five-foot high piece of spray-painted graffiti on the wall of a childhood development center.The Court of Appeal, along with the trial court, concluded that it was. [read post]
22 Mar 2016, 1:46 pm
I'm not going to recite all the facts of this rape conviction, since they're (1) long, and (2) brutal. [read post]
14 Sep 2020, 12:59 pm
It's struck me as strange as I was reading it that this opinion referred to the defendant by his last name (Henderson) and the key male witness the same way (Aguilar), yet referred to the key female witness by only her first name (Tiffany).It may perhaps be that the panel doesn't know Tiffany's last name. [read post]
23 Jan 2014, 11:24 am by Law Offices of David L. Freidberg, P.C.
  Subsequently, in 2012, the Illinois Supreme Court ,in People of the State of Illinois v. [read post]
26 Sep 2011, 5:08 pm by David Kopel
(David Kopel) Currently before the Illinois Supreme Court is People v. [read post]
28 Dec 2015, 12:06 pm
 It's not one of the leading opinions on summary judgment (obviously), but it's nonetheless used as a concrete example of how district courts are supposed to evaluate evidentiary conflicts in determining whether there's a genuine issue of material fact for trial.For people my age, it's a high-profile case. [read post]
17 Dec 2019, 1:34 pm by Benton Martin, E.D. Mich.
Aguilar-Calvo’s sentence of 38 in prison consecutive to 8 months for a supervised-release violation because, it explained, the district court “explicitly disclaimed reliance” on the government’s arguments at sentencing.United States v. [read post]
17 Sep 2013, 10:54 am
This decision came after the recent Illinois Supreme Court ruling striking down part of the state's gun law as unconstitutional (People v. [read post]