 |
|
 |
|
|
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.
| Anderson v. State, No. 607, 2006,
SUPREME COURT OF DELAWARE, July 19, 2007, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: As defendant waived any sufficiency challenge on appeal, but sufficient direct and circumstantial evidence supported his first-degree assault conviction, such was affirmed. Further, the parameters set by the trial judge relating to defendant presenting his defense were also upheld and did not amount to an abuse of discretion or plain error.
|
|||||
| Boatswain v. State, No. 412, 2006,
SUPREME COURT OF DELAWARE, July 19, 2007, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Because defendant presented no evidence that the trial court lacked jurisdiction to sentence him for his felony convictions or that there was any irregularity on the face of the commitment, he was not entitled to habeas corpus relief.
|
|||||
| Christopher v. State, No. 11, 2007,
SUPREME COURT OF DELAWARE, July 19, 2007, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Notwithstanding problems with the colloquy and legal analysis in a ruling on the issue of pro se representation, because defendant revoked and waived his request to represent himself by telling the trial judge that he was absolutely satisfied with counsel's representation, defendant's Sixth Amendment right to self-representation was not violated.
|
|||||
| Drummond v. State, No. 18, 2007,
SUPREME COURT OF DELAWARE, July 19, 2007, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Because a rational trier of fact could have found the essential elements of delivery of cocaine and possession of drug paraphernalia beyond a reasonable doubt, and because defendant's sentence was within the statutory limits, pursuant to Del. Sup. Ct. R. 26(c), defendant's appeal was wholly without merit and devoid of any arguably appealable issue.
|
|||||
| Hsu v. Citibank S.D., No. 609, 2006,
SUPREME COURT OF DELAWARE, July 19, 2007, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Because it was entirely within the trial court's discretion under Del. Super. Ct. R. Civ. P. 107(e) (2007) to grant a creditor an additional three weeks to retain new counsel and to file a late answering brief, and because the credit card debtor was not prejudiced thereby, the judgment entered against the debtor was clearly supported by the record.
|
|||||
| In re TD Banknorth S'holders Litig., C.A. No. 2557-VCL,
COURT OF CHANCERY OF DELAWARE, NEW CASTLE, July 19, 2007, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Court disapproved a proposed class action settlement because the former stockholders of a corporation who supported the settlement failed to address or leverage potentially meritorious claims regarding a breach of the stockholders' agreement. There were also inadequacies in the settlement notice and the nature of the disclosures in the case.
|
|||||
| Junod v. State, No. 675, 2006,
SUPREME COURT OF DELAWARE, July 19, 2007, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Because a probationer did not deny that he absconded from supervision and pleaded guilty to escape, which led to a violation of probation charge, the trial court properly found that the probationer had violated the terms of his probation by committing a new criminal offense and reimposed the unexecuted portion of the probationer's sentence.
|
|||||
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. |
