Search for: "People v. Davis (1988)" Results 1 - 20 of 198
Sort by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
4 Dec 2023, 3:06 pm by Aaron Moss
Well, the U.K. copyright actually did expire in 1987, but one year later, the British Parliament introduced a unique exception to the Copyright Designs and Patents Act of 1988 in favor of the Great Ormond Street Hospital for Children. [read post]
16 Nov 2023, 4:00 am by Shea Denning
Mercado, 307 F.3d 1226, 1229 (10th Cir. 2002) (determining that the automobile exception applied to warrantless search of van that was temporarily inoperable due to mechanical problems) and People v. [read post]
27 Aug 2023, 3:56 pm by Andrew Warren
The statute covers a very wide variety of federal officers and people acting under the direction of federal officers–including elected officials, federal civil employees, federal law enforcement officers, judges, postal workers, military officers, and more. [read post]
24 May 2023, 6:37 am by Paula Junghans
DA Office: “[T]he People further refer defendant to certain facts, among others, set forth in the Statement of Facts relating to … disguising reimbursement payments by doubling them and falsely characterizing them as income for tax reasons Court filing in response to defendant’s request for bill of particulars. [read post]
19 May 2023, 4:00 am by Michael C. Dorf
But few people ever attempt to convert such decisions into a common currency. [read post]
24 Jun 2022, 6:30 am by Guest Blogger
  To a political scientist, one way is by viewing it as a power play by the rabbinate, an attempt many centuries before the United States Supreme Court’s decision in Cooper v Aaron to engage in a performative utterance establishing themselves as the “ultimate interpreters” of the document in question, whether the Torah or the Constitution. [read post]
10 Jun 2021, 11:43 pm by Paul Krantz
  See also People v. [read post]
25 Jan 2021, 9:36 am by Arnold Wadsworth Coggins
We affirm the denial of Malloy‘s motion to suppress under the authority of Davis v. [read post]