Search for: "People v. Duenas" Results 1 - 20 of 20
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
19 May 2020, 3:48 pm
Dueñas" -- which is ironic, as the opinion (which is actually People v. [read post]
25 May 2015, 1:53 pm
A defendant need not commit an affirmative act directed at a child (see People v Hitchcock, 98 NY2d 586, 591 [2002]; People v Johnson, 95 NY2d 368, 371-372 [2002]) nor cause actual harm to a child (see Johnson, 95 NY2d at 371; see also People v Duenas, 190 Misc 2d 801 [App Term, 2d Dept 2002]) to be guilty of Endangering the Welfare of a Child. [read post]
26 Jul 2020, 1:57 pm
It is a must read for anyone debating the ramifications of People v. [read post]
17 Jun 2014, 11:00 am
But Duenas-Alvarez requires that there be 'a realistic probability, not a theoretical possibility, that the State would apply its statute to conduct that falls outsidethe generic definition of a crime.' 549 U. [read post]
19 Apr 2007, 12:46 am
Duenas-Alvarez, No. 05-1629, issued 1/17/2007), Justice Thomas (Weyerhauser Co. v. [read post]
25 May 2015, 1:53 pm by Stephen Bilkis
A defendant need not commit an affirmative act directed at a child (see People v Hitchcock, 98 NY2d 586, 591 [2002]; People v Johnson, 95 NY2d 368, 371-372 [2002]) nor cause actual harm to a child (see Johnson, 95 NY2d at 371; see also People v Duenas, 190 Misc 2d 801 [App Term, 2d Dept 2002]) to be guilty of Endangering the Welfare of a Child. [read post]
29 Apr 2019, 9:44 am by Michael Rushford
  The unanimous Second District Court of Appeals ruling in People v. [read post]