Search for: "Watts v. Mississippi"
Results 1 - 20
of 25
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
2 Apr 2015, 6:00 am
Draper, 627 So. 2d 302, 305 (Miss. 1993) (citing Watts v. [read post]
2 Apr 2015, 6:00 am
Draper, 627 So. 2d 302, 305 (Miss. 1993) (citing Watts v. [read post]
2 Apr 2015, 6:00 am
Draper, 627 So. 2d 302, 305 (Miss. 1993) (citing Watts v. [read post]
17 May 2012, 8:35 am
A decision in the case, Watts v. [read post]
28 Feb 2016, 5:00 am
Watts, 2016 U.S. [read post]
8 Jun 2023, 2:21 pm
Mississippi, 22-6057Issues: (1) Whether Mississippi continues in the present case to erroneously misapply Batson v. [read post]
27 Apr 2018, 3:23 am
It is true they are no longer mandatory, but discretionary pursuant to the Supreme Court’s ruling in United States v. [read post]
15 Jun 2023, 1:09 pm
Watts, which holds that sentencing judges can consider acquitted conduct in imposing a sentence under the factors set forth in 18 U.S.C. [read post]
24 May 2023, 11:02 am
Department of Justice “precleared” Mississippi’s provision to permit it to enter effect. [read post]
26 Apr 2023, 8:29 am
Mississippi when it excludes a third-party confession that is recanted by the dec [read post]
19 Feb 2016, 11:57 am
Brown v. [read post]
29 Jun 2023, 3:33 pm
New Relists Muldrow v. [read post]
23 Jun 2023, 6:55 am
Rudisill v. [read post]
25 Mar 2010, 3:53 pm
L.A. has a 224 CPI, because there are some really cheap housing prices in Watts. [read post]
12 Jun 2013, 8:15 am
Kirby Inland Marine Inc., 482 F.3d 347 (5th Cir. 2007); Watts v. [read post]
20 Apr 2023, 12:54 pm
Mississippi when it excludes a third-party confession that is recanted by the declarant in court and inconsistent with known facts about the crime; and (2) whether recantations by trial witnesses and a recanted third-party confession are sufficient to satisfy Schlup v. [read post]
7 Feb 2012, 8:24 am
Watt. [read post]
9 Sep 2010, 6:57 pm
” Dowling v. [read post]
12 Aug 2021, 8:24 am
Mississippi, 52 St. [read post]
4 Oct 2021, 3:57 pm
That sent me to Oyez.org for the recording of the argument in Watt v. [read post]
