 |
|
 |
|
|
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.
| Gates v. Texaco, Inc., C.A. No. 05C-05-043 RRC,
SUPERIOR COURT OF DELAWARE, NEW CASTLE, May 2, 2008, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
|
|||||
| McDonald v. State, No. 660, 2006,
SUPREME COURT OF DELAWARE, May 2, 2008, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Evidence seized during a traffic stop should have been suppressed because sole basis for traffic stop was a violation of Del. Code Ann. tit. 21, ¿ 4155(a) and (b), which did not apply. Issuing magistrate's consideration of extra-affidavit concerns violated "four corners" test of the Fourth Amendment.
|
|||||
| State v. Laws, I.D. # 30900552DI,
SUPERIOR COURT OF DELAWARE, NEW CASTLE, May 2, 2008, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
|
|||||
| De Prisco v. State, No. 196, 2008,
SUPREME COURT OF DELAWARE, May 5, 2008, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Despite defendant's claim that he did not know of the 30-day deadline for his notice of appeal, and that once he learned of the same he sent the notice prior to the deadline but it did not reach the court before the deadline had expired, his appeal was dismissed pursuant to Del. Sup. Ct. R. 6 and 10 as untimely.
|
|||||
| Walley v. State, No. 179, 2008,
SUPREME COURT OF DELAWARE, May 5, 2008, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Because defendant failed to show cause as to why his appeal should not be dismissed as untimely, and the evidence showed that said failure was not attributable to court-related personnel, his appeal from an order denying him postconviction relief was dismissed pursuant to Del. Sup. Ct. R. 6 and 10.
|
|||||
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. |
