Search for: "People v. Norred"
Results 21 - 40
of 10,564
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
20 May 2014, 4:51 am
Johnson (1989) and United States v. [read post]
12 Nov 2020, 10:42 am
Nor did the census ask about other aspects of legal status. [read post]
15 Nov 2009, 9:00 pm
Roberts v. [read post]
4 Nov 2010, 11:03 am
So long as the computer says that the "regular" registration has expired -- and neither confirms nor denies the existence of a temporary tag (perhaps because temporary tags aren't entered into the computer when you run the plate) -- the driver of the car can't complain. [read post]
17 May 2007, 12:51 pm
He has repeated epileptic seizures, and can neither work nor drive. [read post]
22 Mar 2016, 1:46 pm
Nor will I describe the defendant's purported version of the events.I'll nonetheless say that if you ever wonder why criminal defense attorneys don't have their clients testify, today's opinion is a good explanation.Defendant's story was simply not credible. [read post]
8 Jun 2020, 12:44 pm
Neither the majority nor the dissent mentions this fact. [read post]
20 Dec 2013, 2:16 pm
No one -- neither the prisoners nor prison officials -- want mortal enemies sharing a cell.But I didn't realize the full extent of it.For example, here, in Monterey County, there are separate portions of the jail -- separate dorms -- for (1) people who do not associate with gangs (i.e., people like you and me); (2) Norteno gang members and associates; (3) Sureno gang members and associates (the Norteno and Sureno gangs are the largest in California, and are enemies);… [read post]
21 Apr 2016, 12:53 pm
Unexceptional.Neither good nor bad.The exact opposite of "good" under CALCRIM No. 105.Now, maybe juries don't pay attention to CALCRIM No. 105 anyway. [read post]
29 Jun 2016, 4:57 am
by Jill Paperno, First Assistant Public Defender and author of Representing the Accused: A Practical Guide to Criminal DefenseAmong some of yesterday's disappointing Court of Appeals decisions there is one that can be useful to us - People v. [read post]
4 Jul 2007, 8:11 am
In People v Nugent, Docket No. 267069 For Publication, decided July 3, 2007, the Bay County prosecutor's office sought an order revoking an acknowledgment of parentage. [read post]
23 Mar 2020, 1:06 pm
(See People v. [read post]
10 Mar 2020, 1:10 pm
The Court of Appeal reverses, holding that there's neither statutory nor implicit authority for the imposition of any such order.Which seems right. [read post]
2 Feb 2014, 11:48 am
People v. [read post]
16 Feb 2014, 12:21 pm
People v. [read post]
14 Feb 2022, 1:58 pm
Yeah, the state can order people to wear masks. [read post]
6 Feb 2013, 2:48 pm
I can't draw you a precise picture of the events in words -- nor can the police in their testimony -- but I am absolutely confident that I (along with the police) can reasonably distinguish between someone who looks like they're texting with an unseen object in their right hand and someone who's, say, adjusting their crotch.And we not only allow the police to pull over the former, but affirmatively want them to.Silly argument. [read post]
27 Oct 2016, 11:57 am
Nor do I know precisely how much defendant's court-appointed attorneys were paid for the appeal, or how it cost the non-piecework-paid justices to resolve this appeal in a published opinion.But I bet it was a fair piece over $475. [read post]
23 Dec 2013, 1:36 pm
People v. [read post]
30 Dec 2020, 4:49 pm
You don't want particular bail agents paying off people in jail to refer people to that particular agent. [read post]
