Search for: "People v. Hendricks" Results 1 - 20 of 56
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
23 Oct 2014, 12:23 am
He has gone to some lengths to undermine IP rights belonging to Dame Vivienne Westwood OBE [see Westwood v Knight [2010] EWPCC 16, noted by the IPKat here, and Westwood v Knight [2011] EWPCC 11, noted by the IPKat here, as well as Katpost here] and this time his victim of choice was Scottish designer Alison Hendrick.In this instance Geoffrey Hobbs QC was hearing an appeal against decisions to reject Knight's oppositions to Hendrick's applications to register a… [read post]
10 Sep 2007, 10:20 am
*For a copy of the Appellate Division’s decision, please use this link: People v. [read post]
2 Jan 2012, 8:46 am by Brian Shiffrin
Under those circumstances, we conclude that defendant did not knowingly waive his right to appeal with respect to Supreme Court's denial of the request by defendant for youthful offender status at sentencing (see generally People v McCarthy, 83 AD3d 1533, lv denied 17 NY3d 819; People v Fehr, 303 AD2d 1039, lv denied 100 NY2d 538; People v Hendricks, 270 AD2d 944). [read post]
26 Apr 2009, 12:52 pm
When in response to the prosecutor's question, the main prosecution witness falsely testified that she had received no benefit for he testimony, the prosecutor did not correct this "misstatement" as required (see People v Novoa, 70 NY2d 490, 496-498; People v Hendricks, 2 AD3d 1450, 1451, lv denied 2 NY3d 762; People v Potter, 254 AD2d 831, 832).2. [read post]
11 Jul 2007, 11:55 pm
Supreme Court in Kansas v Hendricks because it does not link an individual's mental illness to his dangerousness. [read post]
25 May 2007, 5:57 am
As noted here on May 15th, on May 22nd, the Indiana Court of Appeals was scheduled to hear oral argument in David Schlotman v. [read post]
12 Jul 2007, 8:01 pm
Supreme Court in Kansas v Hendricks because it does not link an individual's mental illness to his dangerousness. [read post]
1 Apr 2007, 8:09 am
Indianapolis Star columnist Dan Carpenter has an important column today on the Indiana Supreme Court's Feb. 22nd decision in the case of Lambert v. [read post]