Search for: "Young v. Powell" Results 61 - 80 of 141
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
11 Feb 2019, 1:02 pm by Steve Lubet
The convictions were reversed the following year in Powell v. [read post]
21 Sep 2023, 7:20 am by Robin E. Kobayashi
The authors have conducted the first national study of workplace violence against young people in our country. [read post]
8 Feb 2021, 8:02 am by Eugene Volokh
" It seems likely that the decision to expurgate stemmed from the preference of the author of the per curiam, who was later revealed to be Justice Powell; compare Cohen v. [read post]
24 Jun 2016, 3:00 am by SOG Staff
Fortune reports that Justice Kagan, the Supreme Court’s young techno-savvy Justice, is hip to the jive of link shortening and used a Google-shortened link in her dissent in Utah v. [read post]
24 Jun 2016, 3:00 am by SOG Staff
Fortune reports that Justice Kagan, the Supreme Court’s young techno-savvy Justice, is hip to the jive of link shortening and used a Google-shortened link in her dissent in Utah v. [read post]
1 Mar 2010, 3:52 pm by Sherrilyn Ifill
  The case successfully challenging their conviction, Powell v. [read post]
28 Oct 2013, 7:19 pm by Mary Dwyer
Young 13-95Issue: (1) Whether the state forfeits an argument that Stone v. [read post]
14 Nov 2013, 8:29 am by John Elwood
Young, 13-95, the state-on-top habeas case asking whether (1) a state can forfeit application of the Stone v. [read post]
16 Oct 2013, 6:31 am by Mary Dwyer
Young 13-95Issue: (1) Whether the state forfeits an argument that Stone v. [read post]
13 Nov 2009, 9:03 am
Yancy Bonner writes, "Some Young Criminals Should Have Second Chance," for Wyoming's Powell Tribune. [read post]
6 Nov 2013, 7:52 pm by Mary Dwyer
Young 13-95Issue: (1) Whether the state forfeits an argument that Stone v. [read post]
10 Oct 2013, 6:04 pm by John Elwood
Young, 13-95, yet another state-on-top habeas case (this time from the Second Circuit), concerns a whole slew of habeas fun, but in the main asks whether the state can forfeit application of the old rule from Stone v. [read post]