Search for: "People v. Ramirez" Results 1 - 20 of 137
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
19 Mar 2014, 4:08 pm
There are legions of cases that make crystal clear that even though the rule of lenity is supposed to be a cardinal principle of statutory interpretation in the criminal context, in practice, it's pretty much meaningless.Except in this case.A vice principal at a high school has sexual relations with a 14-year old student. [read post]
29 Jan 2015, 3:36 pm
There's the old saying that you shouldn't bring a knife to a gunfight. [read post]
16 Sep 2016, 6:54 pm by David M. Boertje
Ramirez has argued that his search was unlawful, and the evidence resulting from the search must be suppressed under the “fruit of the poisonous tree” doctrine, as detailed in People v. [read post]
16 Sep 2016, 6:54 pm by David M. Boertje
Ramirez has argued that his search was unlawful, and the evidence resulting from the search must be suppressed under the “fruit of the poisonous tree” doctrine, as detailed in People v. [read post]
23 May 2011, 8:51 am by Ted Frank
"Criminal justice expert Kent Scheidegger predicts that vast numbers of people who commit property crimes, such as car thieves, will no longer be imprisoned—so if you live in California, 'don't bother investing much in a car. [read post]
3 May 2019, 1:25 pm
  But I don't think that, as Justice Ramirez says, that Ms. [read post]
29 Jul 2015, 12:10 pm by Seyfarth Shaw LLP
Ramirez to comments such as “Mexicans like you would rather lie than tell the truth” and “I never trusted your kind of people. [read post]
10 May 2011, 12:55 pm
Both involve minors (this one, a 14-year old, and in Ramirez a 16-year old).  [read post]
6 Jul 2017, 2:02 pm
 The Second Circuit agrees with him, and says that people like this are entitled to a shot to obtain bond. [read post]
12 Jun 2007, 11:39 am
It's pretty obvious that the statute is directed at people who convince minors to make kiddie porn, right? [read post]
31 Mar 2007, 1:49 pm
On Blog 702, James England writes that the Colorado Supreme Court has confused Daubert jurisprudence in that state with its opinion this week.... [read post]