Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
(versus) Defendant", as in Roe v. Wade or Miranda v. Arizona. In re is commonly used in case citations of probate and bankruptcy proceedings, such as the General Motors Chapter 11 reorganization, which was formally designated In re General Motors Corp. in court papers. [1] The term is also sometimes used for consolidated cases, as with In re ...
A live-action feature film adaptation of The Sword in the Stone entered development in July 2015, with Bryan Cogman writing the script and Brigham Taylor serving as producer. In January 2018, Juan Carlos Fresnadillo was announced as director. [88] The next month, it was revealed that the film would premiere exclusively on Disney+.
Miranda v. Arizona , 384 U.S. 436 (1966), was a landmark decision of the U.S. Supreme Court in which the Court ruled that law enforcement in the United States must warn a person of their constitutional rights before interrogating them, or else the person's statements cannot be used as evidence at their trial .
Opening Title Production company Cast and crew Ref. J A N U A R Y: 7: White Noise: Universal Pictures / Gold Circle Films: Geoffrey Sax (director); Niall Johnson (screenplay); Michael Keaton, Deborah Kara Unger, Chandra West, Ian McNeice, Mike Dopud, Nicholas Elia, Keegan Connor Tracy, Sarah Strange, Amber Rothwell, Suzanne Ristic, Mitchell Kosterman
Yip Yip! It’s finally time for Netflix’s long-awaited live-action series adaptation of Avatar: The Last Airbender.If you’re already a fan of the story, you’re mostly likely tentatively ...
J. D. B. v. North Carolina, 564 U.S. 261 (2011), was a case in which the Supreme Court of the United States held that age and mental status is relevant when determining police custody for Miranda purposes, overturning its prior ruling from seven years before. J.
Netflix's adaptation of one of the best shonen anime of all time finally has a trailer ahead of its release.
Vega v. Tekoh, 597 U.S. ___ (2022), was a United States Supreme Court case in which the Court held, 6–3, that an officer's failure to read Miranda warnings to a suspect in custody does not alone provide basis for a claim of civil liability under Section 1983 of United States Code. In the case, the Court reviewed its previous holding of Miranda v.