Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
Senate Bill 1004 created penalty for tampering with an electronic monitoring device. Such instances have now dropped significantly, TDCJ director says How a Texas law may be helping plummet cases ...
Schmuck v. United States, 489 U.S. 705 (1989), is a United States Supreme Court decision on criminal law and procedure.By a 5–4 margin it upheld the mail fraud conviction of an Illinois man and resolved a conflict among the appellate circuits over which test to use to determine if a defendant was entitled to a jury instruction allowing conviction on a lesser included charge.
In federal law, crimes constituting obstruction of justice are defined primarily in Chapter 73 of Title 18 of the United States Code. [7] [8] This chapter contains provisions covering various specific crimes such as witness tampering and retaliation, jury tampering, destruction of evidence, assault on a process server, and theft of court ...
The Texas bar association is investigating whether Ken Paxton's failed efforts to overturn the 2020 presidential election based on bogus claims of fraud amounted to professional misconduct.
“The maximum penalty under federal law for mail/wire fraud and witness tampering is 20 years of imprisonment,” the AG’s Office added. “The maximum penalty for obstruction of justice is 10 ...
Nachawati Law Group (formerly Fears Nachawati) is an American plaintiffs' law firm headquartered in Dallas. The law firm was founded in 2006 by Bryan Fears and Majed Nachawati. [1] The firm rebranded in October 2022 following the departure of Bryan Fears, who formed Fears Law. [2] The firm is active in mass tort and multidistrict litigation on ...
Ten doctors, two pharmaceutical executives and two businesses have been indicted in a scheme to bribe doctors for prescriptions, U.S. Attorney for the Northern District of Texas Leigha Simonton ...
In April 2013, the three law firms appointed to lead the plaintiffs in this case asked for $720 million in fees. If approved this would be one of the largest awards of legal fees in American history. They argued that such high fees were reasonable given the amount of the settlement and the risks and complexity of the case.