Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
The city made national headlines over allegations some migrants were eating residents’ pets. But even in Ohio’s Republican-controlled statehouse, this act may be challenging to pass.
Possession of stolen goods is a crime in which an individual has bought, been given, or acquired stolen goods.. In many jurisdictions, if an individual has accepted possession of goods (or property) and knew they were stolen, then the individual may be charged with a crime, depending on the value of the stolen goods, and the goods are returned to the original owner.
Also on Thursday, Fresno County Supervisor Steve Brandau announced that he will introduce a county ordinance to make camping in public spaces a misdemeanor punishable by fines up to $1,000 and up ...
Osborne v. Ohio, 495 U.S. 103 (1990), is a U.S. Supreme Court case in which the Court held that the First Amendment to the United States Constitution allows states to outlaw the possession, as distinct from the distribution, of child pornography. [1] In doing so, the Court extended the holding of New York v.
Here are 10 weird Ohio ... Just don't toast to the Buckeye State if Santa sold you the booze — that's illegal. We took a look at Ohio's history and discovered some puzzling pieces of legislation ...
Mapp v. Ohio, 367 U.S. 643 (1961), was a landmark U.S. Supreme Court decision in which the Court ruled that the exclusionary rule, which prevents a prosecutor from using evidence that was obtained by violating the Fourth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution, applies to states as well as the federal government.
The Monterey County Board of Supervisors on July 26 passed an emergency ordinance quintupling the fine for illegal camping in the Big Sur area from $200 to $1,000 per day, effective immediately.
Although the items sold were not actually illegal, the court refused to enforce the contract for public policy concerns. In Canada, one cited case of lack of enforceability based on illegality is Royal Bank of Canada v. Newell (1997 NSCA 196), in which a woman forged her husband's signature on 40 cheques, totalling over $58,000. To protect her ...