Search for: "United States v. Payne"
Results 121 - 140
of 193
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
20 Oct 2012, 11:18 am
As I noted in my introduction, I want to focus on one aspect of the medical marijuana laws: those relating to the sale of medical marijuana, which involves a little something the United States is normally quite fond of – capitalism. [read post]
4 Oct 2012, 7:10 pm
" United States v. [read post]
25 Aug 2012, 12:17 pm
State v. [read post]
25 Aug 2012, 12:17 pm
State v. [read post]
13 Jul 2012, 10:45 am
While in the United States, [Diamreyan] made no effort to obtain legitimate employment or to advance his education; instead, he continued his involvement in the scheme to defraud.Brief for the United States of America, U.S. v. [read post]
3 Jul 2012, 7:57 am
The concept of "victims' rights" was just then broadening its impact upon the criminal justice system, fueled by a United States Supreme Court decision styled Payne v. [read post]
15 Apr 2012, 1:00 am
” Additionally, when restrictive immigration laws in the 1920s closed the doors to Europe, the Mexican Revolution initiated the first large-scale immigration of Latinos across the border into the United States. [read post]
5 Apr 2012, 11:40 am
See also Payne v. [read post]
30 Mar 2012, 12:21 pm
Payne, 34 A.3d 370 (Conn. 2012); State v. [read post]
16 Feb 2012, 1:16 pm
(Eugene Volokh) From a footnote in United States v. [read post]
2 Feb 2012, 4:16 am
United States v. [read post]
6 Jan 2012, 12:38 pm
Payne A decision was issued by the United States Court of Federal Claims on December 20, 2011, in Martin Construction Co. v. [read post]
26 Dec 2011, 3:03 am
Subsequent to our decision, Respondents filed a petition for panel rehearing or rehearing en banc, and the United States Supreme Court decided Cavazos v. [read post]
16 Dec 2011, 6:05 am
Donoghue of the United States (prior posts) and Xue Hanqin of China (prior posts), both elected in 2010. [read post]
23 Nov 2011, 4:47 am
” There was no deadline in the warrant for completion of the forensic examination and analysis, “nor [does] the Fourth Amendment provide[] for a specific time limit in which a computer may undergo a government forensic examination after it has been seized pursuant to a search warrant” (United States v Hernandez, 183 F Supp 2d 468, 480; see United States v Syphers, 426 F3d 461, 469, cert denied 547 U.S. 1158, 126 S. [read post]
21 Nov 2011, 1:50 pm
United States Soccer Federation denies extending antitrust immunity to USSF in regulating professional soccer, 18 SPORTS LAWYERS JOURNAL 325 (2011)Caitlin M. [read post]
1 Nov 2011, 10:29 pm
State v. [read post]
28 Sep 2011, 12:40 pm
United States dated September 27, 2011. [read post]
13 Sep 2011, 2:54 am
G. v the United Kingdom – 37334/08 [2011] ECHR 1308 (30 August 2011) ??? [read post]
