Search for: "People v. Deal"
Results 121 - 140
of 12,985
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
12 Aug 2022, 3:08 pm
But I'm not exactly sure why we want to stop people from letting their spouses come here. [read post]
13 Jan 2020, 12:16 pm
Those are not trivial costs either.So the real questions are (1) what the Constitution requires (not what the statute says), (2) what's the best policy, for the individual and/or the state, and (3) which procedure is most efficient; a system that routinely enters mandatory orders that few people will ever pay and that burdens people and the system with their enforcement, or a system that takes into account ability to pay but requires hearings for those defendants… [read post]
5 Mar 2013, 11:45 am
When you're dealing with locking up a child for a minimum of 30 years, I think it makes sense to demonstrate some concern. [read post]
11 Jan 2012, 10:17 am
Judges protect that interest when they decide whether or not to approve deals. [read post]
1 Mar 2014, 12:51 pm
(citing Jackson v. [read post]
26 Feb 2018, 6:51 am
The post Competitive Keyword Ads Go to Court: Edible Arrangements v. [read post]
3 Mar 2017, 12:36 pm
There are many types of alternative sentencing in criminal courts that offer a somewhat better deal and sentence that going to public jail. [read post]
19 May 2012, 1:36 pm
Burnip v. [read post]
13 Nov 2007, 1:09 pm
" Sixteen months being a pretty long time for this particular offense, but that's the whole point of the deal. [read post]
25 Jul 2011, 1:26 am
If D1 and D2 voluntarily engage in fighting each other, each intending to kill or cause grievous bodily harm to the other and each foreseeing that the other has the reciprocal intention, and D1 mistakenly kills V in the course of the fight, in what circumstances, if any, is D2 guilty of the offence of murdering V? [read post]
18 Jun 2007, 12:09 pm
. 'Cause three years for getting caught whacking someone ain't that bad a deal at all. [read post]
8 May 2022, 12:25 pm
People v. [read post]
14 Jul 2011, 9:57 am
July 20, 2011 at 2011 WL 2892118, is the first California case that I'm aware of dealing with a class arbitration waiver in the wake of the Supreme Court's ruling in AT&T Mobility v. [read post]
18 Nov 2016, 2:00 pm
United States v. [read post]
24 Jun 2014, 2:18 pm
She found the idea that people have no expectation of privacy in information they turn over to others was “ill suited to the digital age, in which people reveal a great deal of information about themselves to third parties in the course of carrying out mundane tasks. [read post]
5 Feb 2020, 1:10 pm
As were most of the participants in this botched gun sale/drug deal/whatever it was. [read post]
1 May 2008, 10:38 am
Since there are few legal restrictions on consensual sex between adults at this point, however, it is not illegal for three or more people to cohabit, even if they regard themselves as married. [read post]
24 Jun 2013, 8:00 am
Harris v. [read post]
7 Sep 2013, 2:54 am
In Microsoft v. [read post]
9 Jul 2009, 5:38 pm
The appellate courts are supposed to provide guidance to the lower courts and the people in their district. [read post]
