Search for: "Perez v. United States"
Results 681 - 700
of 712
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
11 Jul 2007, 4:45 pm
United States v. [read post]
6 Jul 2007, 4:29 am
We've already deplored the recent decision of the West Virginia Supreme Court rejecting the learned intermediary rule outright, State ex rel. [read post]
5 Jul 2007, 10:37 am
United States, 740 F.2d 1428, 1440 (8th Cir. 1984); Madsen v. [read post]
22 Jun 2007, 12:37 pm
The State does not argue harmless error but commendably acknowledges that Perez's probable testimony would have been important to the defendant's case. [read post]
14 Jun 2007, 1:18 am
COURT OF APPEALS, SECOND CIRCUITCriminal Practice
'Elstad', 'Seibert' Analyzed in Ruling That Two-Step Strategy Not Used in Post-'Miranda' Confession
United States v. [read post]
29 May 2007, 12:23 pm
United States v. [read post]
15 May 2007, 1:58 pm
United States, No. 06-1340.Presumably next Monday the Supremes will announce the denial of Diaz's rehearing petition and Perez's cert petition. [read post]
10 May 2007, 2:17 pm
Perez v. [read post]
9 May 2007, 10:33 am
United States, No. 06-9977. [read post]
3 May 2007, 4:20 pm
See United States v. [read post]
12 Apr 2007, 10:08 am
United States v. [read post]
Ninth Circuit Discusses Withdrawal Under Rule 36(b); Determines Lower Court Did Not Abuse Discretion
5 Apr 2007, 2:44 am
Perez v. [read post]
31 Mar 2007, 4:20 am
United States v. [read post]
28 Mar 2007, 12:20 am
United Parcel Serv., Inc., 179 F.3d 81, 90 n. 3 (3d Cir.1999); Pacheco de Perez v. [read post]
28 Mar 2007, 12:17 am
United Parcel Serv., Inc., 179 F.3d 81, 90 n. 3 (3d Cir.1999); Pacheco de Perez v. [read post]
5 Mar 2007, 7:40 am
United States v. [read post]
14 Feb 2007, 3:46 am
United States v. [read post]
13 Feb 2007, 3:13 am
Higbee Co., 319 F.3d 825, 829 (6th Cir.2003) (en banc) (quoting United States v. [read post]
4 Feb 2007, 10:51 pm
Div. of Occupational & Prof'l Licensing, 240 F.3d 871, 876 (10th Cir.2001); see also Perez v. [read post]
1 Feb 2007, 1:41 pm
Wise presents an unusually interesting issue: "Whether Appellant's confinement conditions, including and in particular with respect to his claim of having been confined with Enemy Prisoners of War in Iraq, were unlawful, and whether, in the context presented, Appellant forfeited his claims of unlawful post-trial confinement by failing to exhaust his administrative remedies under United States v. [read post]
