Search for: "People v. Martinez (2000)" Results 1 - 20 of 56
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
9 Oct 2014, 6:38 pm by Donald Thompson
Assigned counsel promptly moved within five days of his appointment to dismiss the indictment on the ground that defendant had improperly been denied her right to testify before the Grand Jury.see also, People v Mason, 176 AD2d 356 [2nd Dept 1991] [five day period extended where new counsel is assigned]; People v Backman, 274 AD2d 432 [2nd Dept 2000] [same]. [read post]
29 Oct 2010, 9:18 am by Steven G. Pearl
People seem to forget that the Court has no deadline for hearing cases on its docket, as demonstrated by the fact that it took more than five years to decide Martinez v. [read post]
9 Sep 2016, 12:51 pm
Martinez testified that the MVD tracking process reflects that this likelihood of no insurance is ninety percent or greater.State v. [read post]
1 Jul 2013, 9:03 am by The Charge
  Building on Martinez in this term, the Court decided Trevino v. [read post]
7 Mar 2012, 5:51 am by Susan Brenner
The Martinez court relied on an earlier decision of the California Court of Appeals: People v. [read post]
3 Dec 2006, 3:52 pm
United States, 530 U.S. 428 (2000), the case that reaffirmed Miranda v. [read post]
15 Apr 2010, 11:56 am by Lyle Denniston
Martinez, et al. (08-1371). [read post]
2 Jun 2011, 9:10 am
A year later, Vilma Martinez, the first known Mexican American woman to appear before the Supreme Court, argued East Texas Motor Freight Sys., v. [read post]
12 Aug 2014, 10:20 am by Evan M. Levow
The Supreme Court drew the line, however, at checkpoints that stop vehicles for “the discovery and interdiction of illegal narcotics” in 2000’s Indianapolis v. [read post]