Search for: "State v. Pardon"
Results 81 - 100
of 833
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
18 Sep 2014, 3:57 am
Last month Guantanamo detainee Ali al Bahlul filed his opening brief in Al Bahlul v. [read post]
19 Aug 2014, 6:31 am
Yesterday we flagged two amicus briefs filed on behalf of the petitioner in al-Bahlul v. [read post]
21 May 2012, 12:54 pm
Bob Taft and George V. [read post]
6 Dec 2011, 4:44 pm
State v Vaughn In arguing that he had ineffective trial counsel, Vaughn stated that his attorney should not have requested consecutive sentences. [read post]
25 Apr 2024, 3:59 pm
After rage-tweeting throughout the oral argument in Trump v. [read post]
8 Jul 2013, 4:21 am
Last week the court of appeals decided State v. [read post]
5 Mar 2010, 4:33 pm
People v. [read post]
27 Dec 2018, 6:59 pm
In the 1871 case of United States v. [read post]
17 Jul 2014, 11:18 am
” State v. [read post]
16 Jul 2012, 7:46 am
More on Atkins v. [read post]
24 Sep 2021, 11:22 am
Burdick v. [read post]
10 Jul 2014, 7:18 pm
USI Film Prods., 511 U.S. 244, 270–71 (1994) (collecting cases); see also United States v. [read post]
10 Apr 2013, 11:30 pm
; Thambirajah v. [read post]
17 Dec 2018, 5:00 am
Clinton v. [read post]
6 Aug 2013, 12:21 pm
The pardon, therefore, couldn't have been due to concern about patent hold-up, as was stated [PDF], since the ITC specifically found that Samsung had negotiated with Apple in good faith, had already licensed the '348 patent to over 30 companies, and that it was, in fact, Apple that illustrated the danger of reverse hold-up. [read post]
31 Aug 2009, 8:08 am
The Austin Statesman's Mike Ward brings word ("Court cases forcing change at parole agency," Aug. 31) of a recent clash between US District Judge Sam Sparks and an attorney from the Board of Pardons and Parole:U.S. [read post]
21 Aug 2022, 7:39 pm
Worcester v. [read post]
18 Aug 2013, 10:47 am
Harding's pardon of Eugene V. [read post]
6 Jul 2007, 12:03 pm
In a world of politically fired up special prosecutors and Congress v. [read post]
25 Nov 2020, 11:45 am
Appellees cite State v. [read post]
