Search for: "STATE v. CEPEDA"
Results 1 - 18
of 18
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
20 Oct 2021, 7:24 pm
People v. [read post]
31 May 2019, 8:28 am
By Adriel Cepeda Derieux* Late last month, the Supreme Court heard argument in Department of Commerce v. [read post]
25 Feb 2012, 1:43 pm
Citing the Fifth District's opinion in State v. [read post]
15 Feb 2019, 5:46 am
The photographer brought a claim against Hadid [Peter Cepeda v. [read post]
24 Feb 2012, 12:19 pm
They apparently stated that Mr. [read post]
20 Jun 2007, 4:29 am
See Mendoza-Cepeda, 250 F.3d at 628 (recognizing that a consensual encounter may become a seizure); United States v. [read post]
27 Jun 2011, 6:30 am
Virginia, 10-6865 (held since 2/25/11, probably for Bullcoming) Cepeda v. [read post]
4 Feb 2022, 4:36 pm
Manuel Cepeda Vargas v. [read post]
3 Aug 2018, 4:00 am
Courts in New York State have consistently recognized the importance of using progressive discipline.Rulings by the New York State Supreme Court, the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court, and the Court of Appeals, New York State’s highest court, suggest an employer’s in assigning severe penalties for certain “first offenses” may not survive judicial review. [read post]
10 Jan 2009, 4:59 am
Here are some cases in which there were verdicts awarding damages for the loss of an infant's future financial support: Cepeda v. [read post]
7 Feb 2018, 12:00 am
The seminal case in New York State regarding standards of fairness is the Pell decision [Pell v Board of Education, 34 NY2d 222]. [read post]
30 Jan 2011, 8:33 am
Thus, they cited Cepeda v. [read post]
23 Jan 2018, 5:00 am
The first fact pattern was that of the Kidane v. [read post]
22 Jul 2011, 5:58 am
In a case called Cepeda v. [read post]
1 Jan 2012, 8:19 am
Forty-five years ago, the baseball world trained its attention on the Wisconsin Supreme Court and its impending decision in the case of Wisconsin v. [read post]
10 Jun 2008, 2:36 pm
Cepeda-Rios, No. 07-50731 An imposition of an eight level sentence enhancement for a guilty plea conviction for illegal re-entry is affirmed where: 1) the enhancement applied because defendant's second conviction for possession of narcotics would have been a felony if prosecuted under the Controlled Substances Act; and 2) defendant's second state conviction for possession had to be treated as an aggravated felony for purposes of his sentence. [read post]
21 Mar 2016, 9:16 am
On March 6, Dred Scott v. [read post]
19 Apr 2024, 9:27 am
For more information on SEC v. [read post]
