Cases

GUTIERREZ, Judge. Jacob Taylor Rainier appeals from a jury verdict finding him guilty of possession of marijuana with the intent to deliver. Specifically, he contends the district court erred by denying his pretrial motion to dismiss on the basis that marijuana cannot be classified as a schedule I controlled substance and his motion to suppress on the basis that he was not lawfu

Request RejectedThe requested URL was rejected. Please consult with your administrator.Your support ID is: [Go Back]

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF THE STATE OF IDAHO Docket No. 42420 STATE OF IDAHO, ) 2015 Opinion No. 36 ) Plaintiff-Respondent, ) Filed: June 24, 2015 ) v. ) Stephen W. Kenyon, Clerk ) JACOB TAYLOR R

IN THE INTERMEDIATE COURT OF APPEALS OF WEST VIRGINIA FILED June 6, 2025 AVRIAL ARNETTA SAYRE, ASHLEY N. DEEM, CHIEF DEPUTY CLERK Plaintiff Below, Petitioner INTERMEDIATE COURT OF APPEALS

Cite as 2020 Ark. 301 SUPREME COURT OF ARKANSAS No. CR-18-495 Opinion Delivered: October 1, 2020 JACOB JEROME TAYLOR APPELLANT PRO SE APPEAL FROM THE PULASKI V. COUNTY CIRCUIT COURT, FOURTH DIVISION STATE OF

Affirmed and Opinion filed September 28, 2004 Affirmed and Opinion filed September 28, 2004. In The Fourteenth Court of Appeals<

ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANT’S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT Sarah Evans Barker, Judge, United States District Court, Southern District of Indiana This matter comes before the Court on Defendant Jacob Taylor’s (“Officer Taylor”) Motion for Summary Judgment on Counts I and III of Plaintiffs’ Complaint [Dkt. No. 76], filed on February 15, 2016, pursuant to Rule 56 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. For t

STATE OF WEST VIRGINIA SUPREME COURT OF APPEALS Clarence Glaspell, Mary Glaspell, FILED and Jacob Glaspell November 3, 2014 Plaintiffs Below, Petitioners RORY L. PERRY II, CLERK SUPREME COURT OF APPEALS

331 S.W.3d 278 (2011) Robert A. JACOB, M.D., Appellant, v. Philip O. DRIPCHAK, M.D.; Greg W. Rennirt, M.D.; R. Todd Hockenbury, M.D.; Eugene E. Jacob, M.D.; Arnold A. Yashar, M.D.; and Bluegrass Orthopaedic Group, P.S.C., Appellees. No. 2008-CA-001157-MR. Court of Appeals of Kentucky. January 21, 2011. *279 David A. Friedman (arg

JUSTICE HART delivered the Opinion of the Court. ¶ 1 In this interlocutory appeal taken pursuant to C.A.R. 4.1, we review an order from the Denver District Court suppressing the drug evidence that the defendant dropped on the ground when he was approached by the *823 police on the street

PER CURIAM: * Trent Taylor, Texas prisoner # 1691384, has appealed the district court’s interlocutory order denying his motion for appointment of counsel. We will not overturn a district court’s decision regarding appointment of counsel unless the appellant shows a “clear abuse of discretion.” Cupit v. Jones, 835 F.2d 82, 86 (5th Cir. 1987). Because this case does not prese

TOOKEY, J. *461Defendant appeals a judgment of conviction for, among other offenses, three counts of coercion (Counts 1 to 3), ORS 163.275, and one count of felony assault in the fourth-degree constituting domestic violence (Count 5), ORS 163.160(3). The trial court sentenced defendant to 36 months' imprisonment on each of Counts 1 to 3 under 7

JAMES, J. *34Defendant appeals from a judgment revoking his probation and imposing a period of 36 months' incarceration as a revocation sanction. The parties agree that under OAR 213-010-0002(2), when a sentencing court revokes a departure term of probation, the maximum revocation sanction is the defendant's presumptive maximum. Defendant was cate

*854 OPINION JONES, JUDGE: This appeal arises out of the Franklin Circuit Court’s order dismissing the Appellant’s claims on the basis of Governmental Immunity and Qualified Official Immunity. We affirm, albeit, for slightly different reasons than those articulated by the circuit court.1 I.

MELTON, Presiding Justice. Following a jury trial, Yvette Taylor appeals her conviction for the felony murder of Theodore Crew, contending that the trial court made a number of evidentiary errors, including the introduction of improper character evidence and an allegedly involuntary confession.1 For the reasons set forth below, we affirm. 1. In the light most favorable to the verdict, the

Supreme Court of Florida ____________ No. SC13-1826 ____________ STATE OF FLORIDA, Appellant/Cross-Appellee, vs. JACOB JOHN DOUGAN, JR., Appellee/Cross-Appellant. [October 20, 2016] PER CU

DISMISS; and Opinion Filed October 11, 2018. In The Court of Appeals Fifth District of Texas at Dallas No. 05-18-00986-CV IN RE TAYLOR MONNIG, WILLIAM HADALA, JACOB MERTEL, TMG FOUNDERS, LLC, TMGCORE MANAGER, LLC, TMGCORE, LLC, AND BITEVERST, LLC, Relators Original Proceeding from the 380th Judicial

BERGER, Justice: In this appeal we consider, among other things, the constitutionality of Delaware’s gang participation statute, 11 Del. C. § 616. Appellants argue that the statute is unconstitutionally vague because it does not define the term “actively participates.” In addition, they say that the statute is overbroad because it impinges on the right of free association. Both arguments lack merit. A person of ordi

LOLLEY, J. 11 This criminal appeal arises from the First Judicial District Court, Parish of Caddo, State of Louisiana, whereby a jury convicted the defendant, Marcus Andrew Taylor, of manslaughter, a violation a La. R.S. 14:31. After the trial court denied Taylor’s motion to reconsider, he was sentenced to serve 30 years at hard labor. Taylor now appeals, and for the following reasons, we affirm his conviction and sentence.<

DENNIS JACOBS, Circuit Judge: The United States petitions for rehearing following our decision in United States v. Taylor, 736 F.3d 661 (2d Cir.2013). The petition is granted, and the opinion filed December 4, 2013 is withdrawn. For the reasons that follow in our revised opinion, we vacate the convictions of the three defendants and remand for a new trial.