Sentences with phrase «california federal jury trial»

You can read our article about the California federal jury trial decision in POM Wonderful here.

Not exact matches

The group has extensive jury trial experience, having tried numerous cases to verdict in both state and federal court, including several cases recognized by the Daily Journal as top defense verdicts in California.

These include: United States v. Resendiz - Ponce, which presents the question whether the omission of an element from a federal indictment can constitute harmless error (9th Circuit says no); Global Crossing Telecommunications, Inc. v. Metrophones Telecommunications, Inc., on whether a provider of pay phone services can sue a long distance carrier for alleged violations of the Federal Communications Commission's regulations concerning compensation for coinless pay phone calls (9th Circuit says yes); Cunningham v. California, a sentencing case involving whether whether California's Determinate Sentencing Law violates the 6th and 14th amendments to the U.S. Constitution by permitting California state court judges at sentencing to impose enhanced sentenced based on their determination of facts neither found by the jury nor admitted by the defendant; and Carey v. Musladin, reviewing the 9th Circuit's decision to overturn a murder conviction of a defendant who claimed he was denied a fair trial because the victim's relatives appeared in court wearing buttons with the deceased's picture ofederal indictment can constitute harmless error (9th Circuit says no); Global Crossing Telecommunications, Inc. v. Metrophones Telecommunications, Inc., on whether a provider of pay phone services can sue a long distance carrier for alleged violations of the Federal Communications Commission's regulations concerning compensation for coinless pay phone calls (9th Circuit says yes); Cunningham v. California, a sentencing case involving whether whether California's Determinate Sentencing Law violates the 6th and 14th amendments to the U.S. Constitution by permitting California state court judges at sentencing to impose enhanced sentenced based on their determination of facts neither found by the jury nor admitted by the defendant; and Carey v. Musladin, reviewing the 9th Circuit's decision to overturn a murder conviction of a defendant who claimed he was denied a fair trial because the victim's relatives appeared in court wearing buttons with the deceased's picture oFederal Communications Commission's regulations concerning compensation for coinless pay phone calls (9th Circuit says yes); Cunningham v. California, a sentencing case involving whether whether California's Determinate Sentencing Law violates the 6th and 14th amendments to the U.S. Constitution by permitting California state court judges at sentencing to impose enhanced sentenced based on their determination of facts neither found by the jury nor admitted by the defendant; and Carey v. Musladin, reviewing the 9th Circuit's decision to overturn a murder conviction of a defendant who claimed he was denied a fair trial because the victim's relatives appeared in court wearing buttons with the deceased's picture on them.

Represented the former owner of an aviation repair station in a month - long federal criminal jury trial in California.

Our California environmental lawyers also represent clients accused of environmental crimes before grand juries and in state and federal trial and appellate courts.

He has extensive experience in bench and jury trials, binding arbitrations, judicial references, mediations, and appellate work in state and federal courts throughout California.

He has over 30 years of experience in bench and jury trials, binding arbitrations, judicial references, mediations, and appellate work in state and federal courts in California.

In addition, we represented Toshiba and several of its subsidiaries in a high - profile US jury trial concerning the related criminal investigation and civil litigation, and defended Toshiba in securing dismissal of a securities class action in US federal court in California.

Apple told an eight - member jury during opening statements in a high - profile California federal damages trial Tuesday that Samsung owes it more than $ 1 billion for infringing three of Apple's design patents covering iPhones, while Samsung pegged the number at just $ 28 million.