 |
|
 |
|
|
Access State and Federal Case Law, plus U.S. Supreme Court cases — for free!
Click on any of the case links below to view the full text of that case — for free — through lexisONE®, a legal research and news service from LexisNexis®. Login is required — registration is free!
While viewing the full text of the case, select from upgrade options to Shepardize® or view the fully-featured case on lexis.com including Core Terms, Shepard's® Signals, Case Summaries, Print Options, and more. lexisONE offers access to comprehensive content and flexible services for faster, more efficient legal research. Review our flexible LexisNexis® subscriptions offered through daily, weekly or monthly research packages.
| Burton v. State, No. 335, 2008,
SUPREME COURT OF DELAWARE, March 4, 2009, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Because the evidence regarding the alleged ineffectiveness of trial counsel in defendant's pro se Del. Super. Ct. R. Crim. P. 61 motion for postconviction relief had not been considered by the trial court, a remand was appropriate under Del. Sup. Ct. R. 8, in the interests of justice, to consider his new evidence.
|
|||||
| Malin v. State, I.D. # 0608022475B,
SUPERIOR COURT OF DELAWARE, NEW CASTLE, March 4, 2009, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Although defendant described his relationship with his counsel as unpleasant, he failed to explain why their actions were deficient and how their alleged deficient performance probably altered the outcome of his trial; accordingly, he was not entitled to postconviction relief under Del. Super. Ct. R. Crim. P. 61.
|
|||||
| Norman v. State, No. 321, 2008,
SUPREME COURT OF DELAWARE, March 4, 2009, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Although trial court erred in allowing officers who were not offered as experts to testify as lay witnesses that various seized substances were marijuana, error was harmless as officer, properly qualified as expert, testified about how marijuana was packaged, soled, and ingested, and opined that items seized were consistent with sale of marijuana.
|
|||||
| Pena v. Cooper Tire & Rubber Co., C.A. No. 07C-06-059-JRJ,
SUPERIOR COURT OF DELAWARE, NEW CASTLE, March 4, 2009, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
|
|||||
| Riedel v. ICI Ams. Inc., No. 156, 2008,
SUPREME COURT OF DELAWARE, March 4, 2009, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Employer owed no duty to employee's wife to prevent employee from taking asbestos home on clothing or to warn wife of dangers of asbestos exposure, as there was no significant relationship between wife and employer, and such relationship was not created by newsletter providing tips on staying safe at home or provision of benefits to family members.
|
|||||
| Runyon v. State, No. 369, 2008,
SUPREME COURT OF DELAWARE, March 4, 2009, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Denial of an inmate's postconviction relief motion was proper because, inter alia, there was no per se ethical bar to defense counsel representing the inmate based solely on the fact that his counsel was married to his former attorney in an unrelated matter and no actual conflict under Del. Law. R. Prof. Conduct 1.7(a)(2).
|
|||||
| Schweizer v. Bd. of Adjustment, Consol. C.A. No. 06A-08-007 JAP,
SUPERIOR COURT OF DELAWARE, NEW CASTLE, March 4, 2009, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: A board of adjustment properly held a property's non-conforming use as a fraternity house ended, under Newark, Delaware, Zoning Code ¿ 32-51(b), upon a university's suspension of the fraternity because, inter alia, the ordinance did not unlawfully delegate legislative power to the university despite zoning consequences of the university's decision.
|
|||||
| Southern States v. Cropper, No. 52, 2009,
SUPREME COURT OF DELAWARE, March 4, 2009, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
|
|||||
Back to Top
| www.lexisnexis.com | About LexisNexis | Terms & Conditions | Customer Support | Contact Us |
| Copyright® 2009 LexisNexis , a division of Reed Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved. |
