Search results
Results From The WOW.Com Content Network
Taylor was the first case to hold that there is no absolute bar to blocking the testimony of a surprise witness, even if that is an essential witness for the defendant, a limitation of the broad right to present a defense recognized in Washington v. Texas (1967). Taylor was the first Compulsory Process Clause case since Washington v. Texas to ...
The decision to live-stream Supreme Court case proceedings is lauded as a new era in India’s jurisprudence. Namita Singh speaks to experts to see if it can revolutionise legal record keeping
Government of India v Taylor; Court: House of Lords: Full case name: Government of India v (1) Samuel Henry Taylor and (2) William Deuchars Hume : Decided: 20 January 1955: Citations [1955] AC 491 [1955] 1 All ER 292 (1955) 22 ILR 286: Court membership; Judges sitting: Viscount Simonds Lord Morton of Henryton Lord Reid Lord Keith of Avonholm ...
(The Center Square) – It’s now up to the Illinois Supreme Court to decide if a recently enacted state law limiting where people can file constitutional challenges against the state to Sangamon ...
Main page; Contents; Current events; Random article; About Wikipedia; Contact us; Donate
(The Center Square) – The Illinois Supreme Court is considering whether to find a state firearms statute prohibiting open carry unconstitutional in the case Illinois v. Tyshon Thompson. Thompson ...
Taylor v. United States , 495 U.S. 575 (1990), was a U.S. Supreme Court decision that filled in an important gap in the federal criminal law of sentencing. The federal criminal code does not contain a definition of many crimes, including burglary , the crime at issue in this case.
Williams v. Taylor, 529 U.S. 362 (2000), was a United States Supreme Court case decided on April 18, 2000. It concerned a federal habeas corpus petition brought by convicted murderer Terry Williams, who alleged that he had received ineffective assistance of counsel in violation of the Supreme Court's prior decision in Strickland v.