Cases

IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF DELAWARE STATE OF DELAWARE ) ) v. ) Case Nos.: 2102001459 ) 2301009216 CEDRIC SAYLOR, ) ) Defendant. ) OPINION AND ORDER Upon Consideration of Defendant’s Motion for R

PER CURIAM: * Appealing the judgment in a criminal case, Oneida Denise Saylor raises an. argument that is foreclosed by United States v. Tuma, 738 F.3d 681, 693 (5th Cir.2013), cert. denied, — U.S. -, 134 S.Ct. 2875, 189 L.Ed.2d 835 (2014). In Tuma, we held that Alleyne v. United States, — U.S. -, 133 S.Ct. 2151, 186 L.Ed.2d 314 (2013) applies “only to facts that

OPINION KENNEDY, Circuit Judge. I. Plaintiffs Pearl Saylor, et al., appeal from the district court’s dismissal of their action seeking to quiet title to a tract of land currently in possession of the United States. The property at issue in this case originally belonged to Alice Asher. Alice Ash-er died on

CHIEF JUSTICE SAYLOR We allowed appeal in this post-conviction matter to consider whether Appellant is entitled to a new trial, because counsel failed to request that the jury receive an alibi instruction or object to the trial court's failure to give one. In the early morning hours of July 4, 2008, Appellant's former girlfriend, Sonsiarae Watts, and her boyfriend, Dahl Palm, were shot to death inside Ms. Watts' home

760 P.2d 232 (1988) 306 Or. 267 Lonnie ROGERS, Petitioner On Review v. Sam SAYLOR, John Blackman, Jerry R. Hill, Robert Peterson, Multnomah County, and City of Gresham, Respondents On Review, Harold R. Boehmer, Defendant. CC A8409-05447; CA A35289; SC S34838. Supreme Court of Oregon, In Banc. Argued and Submitted April 6, 1988. Decid

MEMORANDUM AND ORDER ON DEFENDANTS’ MOTIONS TO DISMISS SAYLOR, District Judge. This is a suit under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 arising out of the falsification of drug tests at the William F. Hinton Drug Laboratory in Jamaica Plain, Massachusetts, by chemist Annie Dookhan. In 2010, plaintiff David Jones was convicted of distribution of crack cocaine and sentenced to a term of imprison

*16 OPINION Justice EAKIN. This is an appeal from the order denying appellant’s third petition for relief under the Post Conviction Relief Act (PCRA), 42 Pa.C.S. § 9541 et seq., as untimely. We affirm. Appellant was convicted of first degree murder and sentenced to death for ordering the murder of a rival gang member. H

JUSTICE DOUGHERTY, dissenting I respectfully dissent. The learned majority's holding subjects appellant to the harsh penalty of waiver for failing to meet a previously unrecognized and unarticulated prerequisite to place specific objections to proposed points of charge on a transcribed record. In my view, appellant adhered to the explicit requirements of our Rules of Civil Procedure, and nothing more was required of her to preserve

MURDOCK, Justice. Korie Sterling Saylor appeals from a summary judgment denying her claim for an elective share of the estate of her deceased husband, Woodie Jim Saylor. We affirm. I. Facts and Procedural History Woodie and Korie married in October 2005. Woodie died in May 2011. In addition to Korie, Woodie w

*210Justice TODD, concurring. I concur in the Majority Opinion insofar as I believe it reaches the correct legal result, namely, that sufficient probable cause existed for the magisterial district judge to issue a search warrant for the dormitory room jointly shared by Appellee and the decedent, Abdul Sesay, in order to confirm his identity as the sho

[Cite as Naiman Family Partners, L.P. v. Saylor, 2020-Ohio-4987.] COURT OF APPEALS OF OHIO EIGHTH APPELLATE DISTRICT COUNTY OF CUYAHOGA NAIMAN FAMILY PARTNERS, L.P., ET AL., : Plaintiffs-Appellants, : No. 108607 v. : DAVID SAYLOR,

*289 OPINION Justice TODD.1 In this capital case, Appellant James Jones appeals the August 11, 2006 order of the Philadelphia County Court of Common Pleas dismissing without a hearing his petition for relief under the Post Conviction Relief Act (“PCRA”), 42 Pa.C.S.A. §§ 9541-46. This case is before this Court fo

Justice SAYLOR, concurring. I have no objection to the majority’s approach to sentencing merger in the absence of a specific expression of legislative intent; indeed, consistent with such approach, I believe that it is sensible to treat criminal trespass as a lesser-included offense of burglary. However, I agree with Madame Justice Newman that the Legislature has now evinced an intent in Section 9765 of the

Chief Justice CAPPY concurring. I join the majority opinion except for the first two points raised by Justice Saylor’s concurring opinion regarding this court’s decision in Commonwealth v. Collins, 585 Pa. 45, 888 A.2d 564 (2005) and the discussion regarding transferred intent as set forth in Commonwealth v. Huffman, 536 Pa. 196, 638 A.2d 961 (1994).

Justice SAYLOR, concurring. I agree with the majority that common pleas courts are clearly competent to hear criminal cases such as the one at issue. See, e.g., Commonwealth v. Bethea, 574 Pa. 100, 113, *309828 A.2d 1066, 1075 (2003). The case law with regard to the components of subject matter jurisdiction, however, does not unambiguously in

United States Court of Appeals For the Eighth Circuit ___________________________ No. 14-3889 ___________________________ James Saylor lllllllllllllllllllll Plaintiff - Appellee v. State of Nebraska lllllllllllllllllllll Defend

Justice SAYLOR concurring. I join the majority in remanding the claim of racial discrimination in jury selection for adequate judicial review before the post-conviction court. Left to my own devices, however, I would broaden the remand to also include a directive for the PCRA court to also conduct a hearing on the claim of deficient stewardship on the part of appellate counsel for failing to obtain judicia

ORDER PER CURIAM. AND NOW, this 21st day of September, 2004, the order of the common pleas court is AFFIRMED. See Commonwealth v. Robinson, 575 Pa. 500, 837 A.2d 1157 (2003).

MEMORANDUM WILLIAM M. NICKERSON, Senior District Judge. Before the Court are the following motions: (1) a motion to dismiss filed by three Frederick County Sheriffs Deputies: Defendants Richard Roehford, Scott Jewell, and James Harris (the Deputies), ECF No. 26; (2) a motion to dismiss, or for *413summary judgment, filed by Defendant Reg

Justice SAYLOR, concurring and dissenting. I would remand to the PCRA court for a hearing on the claims of ineffective assistance of post-conviction counsel and write to the following points: First, I favor consistent enforcement of the governing procedural rules, which serve to ensure fairness and reliability in the collateral review process. See generally Commonwealth v. Williams, </