Latest Law News
BRISCOE v. STATE
A jury found Briscoe guilty on both counts and the trial court sentenced Briscoe to fifteen years of imprisonment on each count, with the sentences to run concurrently. Briscoe appealed his conviction to this Court, which affirmed the trial court's
Updated: 03/16/2011 07:31A
STATE v. STEWART
The jury returned a verdict of guilty on all three counts. Stewart filed a motion for acquittal or, in the alternative, a new trial, claiming, inter alia, that there was insufficient evidence that Stewart committed the criminal offense of leaving the
Updated: 03/16/2011 07:31A
MONTEDONICO v. MT. GILLION BAPTIST CHURCH
Edward Montedonico, trustee for Michael Jefferies's bankruptcy estate, filed suit against Mount Gillion Baptist Church in the Circuit Court of Panola County. He alleged that the church had negligently provided Jefferies, an independent contractor,
Updated: 03/16/2011 07:31A
HAKALA v. CAMBRIO BUSH, LLC
Appellant Paul R. Rambow, d/b/a Rambow Law Firm, PA, (Rambow) represented Rozella Boston and Danae Smith 1 (the clients) in personal-injury actions that arose out of an automobile accident. At all relevant times, the clients were tenants under a
Updated: 03/16/2011 07:31A
HAKALA v. CAMBRIO BUSH, LLC
Appellant Paul R. Rambow, d/b/a Rambow Law Firm, PA, (Rambow) represented Rozella Boston and Danae Smith 1 (the clients) in personal-injury actions that arose out of an automobile accident. At all relevant times, the clients were tenants under a
Updated: 03/16/2011 07:31A
HAKALA v. CAMBRIO BUSH, LLC
Appellant Paul R. Rambow, d/b/a Rambow Law Firm, PA, (Rambow) represented Rozella Boston and Danae Smith 1 (the clients) in personal-injury actions that arose out of an automobile accident. At all relevant times, the clients were tenants under a
Updated: 03/16/2011 07:31A
A truly Islamic State Protects Christians
The widespread and deep desire for Pakistan to be what it was meant to be, for justice to be guaranteed for all, and for some of the most easily abused laws on the statute book to be reviewed is being paralysed by the threat of murder.
Updated: 03/16/2011 07:30A
STATE v. RIESGRAF
An appellate court of this state "will not disturb a guilty verdict if the jury, acting with due regard for the presumption of innocence and for the necessity of overcoming it by proof beyond a reasonable doubt, could reasonably conclude that a
Updated: 03/16/2011 07:30A
STATE v. RAMEY
Appellant also argues that the evidence was insufficient to sustain the verdict. We affirm. RP obtained an HRO against appellant Scott Wade Ramey on July 8, 2008. The express terms of the HRO prohibited any contact, direct or indirect, between Ramey
Updated: 03/16/2011 07:30A
STATE v. RAMEY
Appellant also argues that the evidence was insufficient to sustain the verdict. We affirm. RP obtained an HRO against appellant Scott Wade Ramey on July 8, 2008. The express terms of the HRO prohibited any contact, direct or indirect, between Ramey
Updated: 03/16/2011 07:30A
Primary Categories