Cases

PER CURIAM. The appellant, Tonya Rhodes, representative of the estate of James E. West (hereinafter “plaintiff”), in this 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action appeals a summary judgment entered by the district court in favor of the appellees Deputy Sheriff Craig McDannel, Sheriff H. Cal Rosema, and the Van Burén County Sheriff’s Department. This case arises out of a

McCarthy, J. Appeal from a judgment of the County Court of Fulton County (Giardino, J.), rendered September 8, 2014, convicting defendant upon his pleas of guilty of the crimes of criminal sale of a controlled substance in the third degree (two counts) and criminal possession of a controlled substance in the third degree (two counts). Defendant was charged in an indictment with two counts o

BURKE, Chief Justice. [T1] Appellant, Marty Wayne Rhodes, challenges his convictions for child abuse and third-degree sexual abuse of a minor under Wyo. Stat. Ann. § 6-2-503(b)(@) and § 6-2-S3l6(a)(iv) (LexisNexis 2011). He contends he was denied his rights to a speedy trial and to effective assistance of counsel. He also contends the evidence was insufficient to support his conviction for third-degree sexual abuse of a mino

OPINION BY STEVENS, P.J. This is an appeal from the judgment of sentence entered in the Court of Common Pleas of Lancaster County following Appellant’s conviction by a jury on one count of rape, two counts of attempted rape, one count of involuntary deviate sexual intercourse, two counts of aggravated indecent assault, ten counts of indecent assault, and two counts of corruption of minors.1

Justice Goldberg, for the Court. This case came before the Supreme Court on March 6, 2018, pursuant to an order directing the parties to appear and show cause why the issues raised in this appeal should not be summarily decided. The defendants, Craig J. DiPetrillo and Rebecca M. DiPetrillo (defendants), appeal from a Superior Court judgment granting summary judgment in favor of the plai

OPINION Chief Justice SUTTELL, for the Court. The defendant, Craig Van Dongen, was found guilty of domestic simple assault and domestic disorderly conduct by a Superior Court justice sitting without a jury. He now appeals from the judgment of conviction, arguing that the trial justice erred by: (1) overlooking and misconceiving material evidence; (2)

PATRICK E. HIGGINBOTHAM, Circuit Judge: Under Texas law, a person who serves a month in prison has that month of “calendar time” credited toward his sentence. A person who serves a month on parole may likewise earn a month of “[s]treet-time credit,” a form of calendar time which also counts toward a sentence. 1 We consid

Supreme Court No. 2025-121-Appeal. (P 09-1898) Michele B. Codere-Wilson : v. : Craig S. Wilson. : NOTICE: This opinion is subject to formal revision before publication in the Rhode Island Reporter. Readers are requested to notify the Opinion Analyst, Supreme Court of Rhode Isla

196 P.3d 632 (2008) 2008 UT App 374 Clyde A. RHODES and Randy B. Birch, Plaintiffs and Appellants, v. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION, Dian McGuire, and Craig Fox, Defendants and Appellees. No. 20070096-CA. Court of Appeals of Utah. October 23, 2008. Randy B. Birch, Salt Lake City, for Appellants. Mark L. Shurtleff, Atty. Gen., and Brent

Appeal from a judgment of the Superior Court for King County, No. 00-2-22473-7, J. Kathleen Learned, J., entered October 27, 2000. Affirmed by unpublished opinion per Coleman, J., concurred in by Becker, C.J., and Kennedy, J.

McGee Brown, J. Introduction {¶ 1} The issue in this appeal is the meaning of the term “aggrieved” as it is used in R.C. 149.351. 1 The question presented is whether a party automatically

521 S.E.2d 579 (1999) 271 Ga. 481 RHODES v. The STATE. No. S99A0939. Supreme Court of Georgia. September 20, 1999. *580 Stanley C. House, Augusta, for appellant. Daniel J. Craig, District Attorney, Charles R. Sheppard, Assistant District Attorney, Thurbert E. Baker, Attorney General, Paula K. Smith,

MANION, Circuit Judge. The defendant is the U.S. Forest Service’s District Ranger for the Vienna District of the Shawnee National Forest in southern Illinois. The plaintiffs are five neighbors of the Burke Branch Research Natural Area — part of the Shawnee National Forest — who use Burke Branch for such activities as hiking and nature photography. They seek declaratory and injun

456 F.2d 608 Craig MORGAN et al., Plaintiffs-Appellants,v.James RHODES et al., Defendants-Appellees. No. 71-1335. United States Court of Appeals,Sixth Circuit. Feb. 15, 1972. Sanford Jay Rosen, New York City, Harold Weinstein, Cleveland, Ohio, on brief; Michael E. Geltner, Stanley K. Laughlin, Columbus, Ohio,

CROW, Judge. At 2:30 a.m., June 23, 1997, a patrolman of the Missouri State Highway Patrol saw a motor vehicle exceeding the speed limit in a “construction zone.” The patrolman stopped the vehicle; its operator was Patrick J. Rhodes (“Driver”). At the patrolman’s request, Driver performed six “field sobriety tests.” Driver’s performance, coupled with the result of a “portable breath test” administered by

38 F.Supp.2d 1353 (1999) Richard M. RHODES, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, Plaintiffs, v. OMEGA RESEARCH, INC.; William R. Cruz; Ralph L. Cruz; Bancboston Robertson Stephens; Lehman Brothers; and Hambrecht & Quist Defendants. No. 98-0174-CIV. United States District Court, S.D. Florida. March 1, 1999. *1

264 Ga. 123 (1994) RHODES v. THE STATE. S94A0581. Supreme Court of Georgia. Decided April 18, 1994. Elizabeth C. Calhoun, Richard O. Ward, for appellant. Daniel J. Craig, District Attorney, Michael J. Bowers, Attorney General, Susan V. Boleyn, Senior Assistant Attorney General, Rachelle L. Strausner, Assistant Attorney General, for appellee.

Field, C. J. delivered the opinion of the Court Cope, J. concurring. It is difficult to perceive upon what ground the order staying proceedings in this action can rest, except the bare possibility that the officers of the General Land Office at Washington may come to a different conclusion from that of the authorities of the State as to the validity of the location of the school warrant upon which the patent to

OPINION Justice GOLDBERG, for the Court. These consolidated cases came before the Supreme Court on September 25, 2012, pursuant to an order directing the parties to appear and show cause why the issues raised in this appeal should not summarily be decided. The plaintiffs, Craig Sacco (Sacco) and Charles Pearson (Pearson) (collectively, plaintiffs), brought sui

Before Division Two: James Edward Welsh1 , Presiding Judge, Alok Ahuja, Judge, Anthony Rex Gabbert, Judge Anthony Rex Gabbert, Judge *483The State appeals the grant of a motion to suppress statements made by Respondent Genevieve Craig. The State argues the motion court erred, because Craig's statements were voluntary and not