Search for: "People v. Cross"
Results 361 - 380
of 6,071
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
1 Jun 2023, 11:43 am
Vidal v. [read post]
3 May 2022, 9:01 pm
By contrast, if police took a statement in violation of Miranda, the statement would be inadmissible in the government’s affirmative case but admissible on cross-examination of the defendant, under Harris v. [read post]
18 Sep 2013, 9:55 am
Consumer Depot, Abramson v. [read post]
27 May 2016, 6:24 am
Additional Resources: Trotter v. [read post]
16 Dec 2009, 7:16 pm
On 12/15/09 in People v Wrotten (a name that works), the Court of Appeals, relying on People v Cintron (75 NY2d 249 [1990]) held that permitting an adult complainant living in another state to testify via real-time, two-way video after finding that because of age and poor health he was unable to travel to New York to attend court was within the trial court's inherent powers under Judiciary Law § 2-b, absent any specific statutory authority for such… [read post]
10 Jan 2008, 2:32 pm
Note also that it is in general accord with People v. [read post]
19 Jul 2012, 11:27 am
Presently, about 3,000 people a year are diagnosed. [read post]
19 Jul 2012, 11:27 am
Presently, about 3,000 people a year are diagnosed. [read post]
9 Dec 2016, 11:00 am
Yesterday, the next hearing in Wikimedia Foundation v. [read post]
7 Oct 2016, 10:42 am
In Doe v. [read post]
9 Jan 2017, 3:19 pm
It is unfortunate that it has taken so long for people to wake up to it. [read post]
11 Aug 2012, 1:42 pm
A few months ago, the Maryland high court ruled in Tracey v. [read post]
11 Aug 2012, 1:42 pm
A few months ago, the Maryland high court ruled in Tracey v. [read post]
28 Jun 2007, 9:20 am
So, for example, if I go to the CanLII report of the Johnson v. [read post]
11 Aug 2012, 1:42 pm
A few months ago, the Maryland high court ruled in Tracey v. [read post]
11 Aug 2012, 1:42 pm
A few months ago, the Maryland high court ruled in Tracey v. [read post]
8 Sep 2011, 11:45 am
Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit to render an opinion in Hadden v. [read post]
11 Jun 2009, 9:51 am
You can't banish people, even as a condition of probation. [read post]
8 Mar 2013, 4:24 am
People v. [read post]
28 Nov 2011, 3:16 am
We note, however, that such questions were improper (see People v Paul, 229 AD2d 932; People v Paul, 212 AD2d 1020, 1021, lv denied 85 NY2d 912; People v Edwards, 167 AD2d 864, lv denied 77 NY2d 877). [read post]