Search for: "United States v. Martinez"
Results 261 - 280
of 877
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
12 Jun 2011, 8:41 am
The deadline for either a cert petition or request for additional time to file a cert petition in United States v. [read post]
18 Oct 2010, 2:36 pm
United States v. [read post]
30 Apr 2012, 9:07 am
Opinions and statements expressed in these profiles are those of their subjects - not the State Bar of Texas. [read post]
12 Aug 2011, 7:10 am
In Sandoval v. [read post]
27 Feb 2013, 1:25 pm
United States. [read post]
30 Apr 2007, 5:28 am
United States v. [read post]
29 Nov 2016, 9:42 am
(c) United States v. [read post]
8 Dec 2009, 11:32 am
Martinez - so compelling is that both parties to the case elicit our sympathies. [read post]
2 Feb 2013, 11:33 am
In Illinois v Wardlow (528 US 119 [2000]), the United States Supreme Court, by a 5-4 vote, held that a person in a high crime area fleeing at the sight of police is, by itself, sufficient to create reasonable suspicion, under the Fourth Amendment to the United States Constitution. [read post]
6 Jan 2022, 9:42 am
State of Alaska (Indian Child Welfare Act) Martinez v. [read post]
8 Jun 2011, 6:11 am
Plata and Citizens United v. [read post]
29 Nov 2016, 6:15 pm
They noted that the Supreme Court has also ruled, in United States v. [read post]
20 Aug 2010, 9:08 pm
United States v. [read post]
22 Oct 2014, 6:13 am
Martinez, 436 U.S. 49, 56, 58-59 (1978). [read post]
11 Aug 2011, 10:49 am
Joel Martinez Hernandez, Case No. 11-20446-Cr-Moreno; and United States v. [read post]
11 Aug 2011, 10:49 am
Joel Martinez Hernandez, Case No. 11-20446-Cr-Moreno; and United States v. [read post]
9 Sep 2013, 4:05 am
Martinez, (Education Law Reporter, 2013, Forthcoming).James G. [read post]
4 Nov 2013, 4:00 am
Schmid, The Real Shariah Risk: Why the United States Cannot Afford to Miss the Islamic Finance Moment, (University of Illinois Law Review, Vol. 2013, No. 3, 2013).Davi S. [read post]
15 Oct 2015, 1:16 pm
Martinez, 538 U.S. 760, 766 (2003) (plurality op.) [read post]
18 May 2007, 9:37 am
In Matter of Romero v Martinez, 280 AD2d 58 [2001], lv denied 96 NY2d 721 [2001], the First Department found that a NYC Housing Authority resident may have continued occupancy conditioned on the "permanent exclusion" of a dangerous individual, which can include a prohibition on visitation. [read post]
