Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
Bullcoming v. New Mexico, 564 U.S. 647 (2011), is a significant 6th Amendment Confrontation Clause case decided by the United States Supreme Court.On June 23, 2011, the Supreme Court considered the issue whether a defendant's Confrontation Clause rights extend to a non-testifying laboratory analyst whose supervisor testifies as to test results that the analyst transcribed from a machine.
Chamber of Commerce v. Whiting: 09-115: 2011-05-26 An Arizona law that sanctions employers who hire illegal immigrants is not preempted by federal immigration law. J.D.B. v. North Carolina: 09-11121: 2011-06-16 Age is relevant in Miranda cases. Bullcoming v. New Mexico: 09-10876 [dead link ] 2011-06-23
Case name Citation Date decided Sykes v. United States: 564 U.S. 1: June 9, 2011 Talk Am., Inc. v. Mich. Bell Tel. Co. 564 U.S. 50: June 9, 2011 DePierre v. United States
Constitutional law of the United States; Overview; Articles; Amendments; History; Judicial review; Principles; Separation of powers; Individual rights; Rule of law
The incident happened at Mountain View High School in Orem, Utah, and prompted a brief lockdown of the school, the Alpine School District said. 6 Utah high school students stabbed, including teen ...
New Mexico, 564 U.S. 647 (2011), the Court ruled that admitting a lab chemist's analysis into evidence, without having him testify, violated the Confrontation Clause. [ 15 ] [ 16 ] In Michigan v. Bryant , 562 U.S. 344 (2011), the Court ruled that the "primary purpose" of a shooting victim's statement as to who shot him, and the police's reason ...
Texas brought the current lawsuit against New Mexico in 2013, alleging that farmers pumping from groundwater wells in southern New Mexico were diverting water that the compact allocates to Texas.
Main page; Contents; Current events; Random article; About Wikipedia; Contact us; Help; Learn to edit; Community portal; Recent changes; Upload file