Search for: "People v. Jones" Results 161 - 180 of 2,388
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
11 Mar 2020, 4:26 pm
  After all, the money flows the way it does regardless.That said, try as I might -- and I've tried hard -- I can't exactly tell what Justice Jones is trying to say in this opinion.If her point is that the trial court awarded $1.4 million in fees and costs to California and that wasn't an abuse of discretion given these facts, yep, right on. [read post]
23 Jan 2012, 10:09 am by PaulKostro
The Fourth Amendment protects the “right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures. [read post]
22 Jun 2018, 9:20 am by Orin Kerr
" As a result, it violates the reasonable expectation of privacy people have in their physical movements from the Jones concurrences. 5) How Is Accessing Historical Cell-Site Records "Absolute Surveillance"? [read post]
23 Jan 2012, 1:07 pm by Tom Goldstein
As a result, I think that although the government lost Jones 9-0, it did far better than everyone has recognized so far. [read post]
8 Apr 2016, 1:43 pm
 The People of the State of California agree, and support the trial court's view of the statute on appeal.But the Court of Appeal disagrees. [read post]
14 Nov 2011, 4:41 am
Venal & Grabbit, Solicitors:===PRESS RELEASE===London, 9th November 2011: Venal & Grabbit welcome the decision of the Supreme Court in Jones v Kernott today. [read post]
1 Jul 2019, 3:16 am by SHG
If this doesn’t really do much to explain the conflict, that’s largely the problem with Roe v. [read post]