Ad
related to: texas discovery objection marshal evidence report
Search results
Results From The WOW.Com Content Network
Aguilar v. Texas, 378 U.S. 108 (1964), was a decision by the United States Supreme Court, which held that "[a]lthough an affidavit supporting a search warrant may be based on hearsay information and need not reflect the direct personal observations of the affiant, the magistrate must be informed of some of the underlying circumstances relied on by the person providing the information and some ...
But in 147 incidents, marshals seized cash, jewelry, cell phones, and automobiles even though no contraband was found, and the motorist was not charged with any crime. [1] Many of these were African-American or Latino drivers. [2] [3] At least 150 motorists had property seized by the Tenaha marshal’s office, totaling more than US$3 million. [2]
The case was discussed again in a 2009 investigative report in The New Yorker. [2] This coverage suggested that the arson evidence was misinterpreted. According to an August 2009 investigative report by an expert hired by the Texas Forensic Science Commission, the original claims of arson were doubtful. [3]
Section 15 of the Judiciary Act of 1789 provided: [A]ll the said courts of the United States, shall have power in the trial of actions at law, on motion and due notice thereof being given, to require the parties to produce books or writings in their possession or power, which contain evidence pertinent to the issue, in cases and under circumstances where they might be compelled to produce the ...
Tampering with evidence is closely related to the legal issue of spoliation of evidence, which is usually the civil law or due process version of the same concept (but may itself be a crime). Tampering with evidence is also closely related to obstruction of justice and perverting the course of justice , and these two kinds of crimes are often ...
California is the major "outlier" on deposition objections; under the California Civil Discovery Act as enacted in 1957 and heavily revised in 1986, most objections must be given on the record at the deposition (and must be specific as to the objectionable nature of the question or response) or they are permanently waived. [14]
The convention also applies to pre-trial discovery: obtaining of evidence prior to trial without the prior approval of a judge. While this is a common practice in many common law countries, it was felt unacceptable by many others. Countries can however object to application to pre-trial discovery through an objection according to Article 23.
On November 28, Trump's attorneys submitted a motion to compel discovery in two separate filings with 59 separate requests for evidence from the prosecution related to vote fraud in the election, actual or attempted foreign interference with election infrastructure during the election, political bias in U.S. Intelligence Community assessments ...