A criminal defendant bears the burden of establishing the defense that he withdrew from a drug distribution conspiracy outside the statute of limitations.
A criminal defendant bears the burden of establishing the defense that he withdrew from a drug distribution conspiracy outside the statute of limitations, the U.S. Supreme Court has ruled.
The former principal of a successful charter school has won a disputed $155.7 million verdict against the city manager for destroying her reputation.
WASHINGTON – During oral arguments on Tuesday, the U.S. Supreme Court had the challenging task of determining whether the prosecution or the defense has the burden of proving at trial whether the defendant withdrew from a criminal conspiracy.
A district attorney in California claims the state bar has violated his civil rights by trying to disbar him for being a former drug addict.
A jury has awarded a Maryland father $720,000 in his lawsuit against his former wife and three other people, in which he claimed his ex-wife encouraged their 16-year-old daughter to run away and allowed her to marry rather than honor a court order granting him custody.
The U.S. Supreme Court will decide whether the governments bears the burden of proving that a defendant did not withdraw from a criminal conspiracy prior to the statute of limitations period once he produces evidence at trial that he did withdraw.
A 12-person jury in Illinois awarded $89.6 million – $80 million of it in punitives – against four defendants in a suit brought by a former pipefitter suffering from mesothelioma.
A businessman who spent several years in prison after he was wrongfully convicted of molesting his stepdaughter has reached a $15.5 settlement with the Kansas City suburb of Lee’s Summit.