Featured Firms
Presented by BigVoodoo
Because the written statement was not the result of a custodial interrogation, the statement was admissible under Article 38.22. The court also finds no unlawful acts committed by the store employees; therefore, Article 38.23, which applies to"all persons,does not offer a ground for suppressing the evidence.
November 29, 2004 at 12:00 AM
1 minute read
The original version of this story was published on Texas Lawyer
Presented by BigVoodoo
Law firms & in-house legal departments with a presence in the middle east celebrate outstanding achievement within the profession.
The premier educational and networking event for employee benefits brokers and agents.
The Legal Intelligencer honors lawyers leaving a mark on the legal community in Pennsylvania and Delaware.
Atlanta s John Marshall Law School is seeking to hire one or more full-time, visiting Legal WritingInstructors to teach Legal Research, Anal...
Lower Manhattan firm seeks a premises liability litigator (i.e., depositions, SJ motions, and/or trials) with at least 3-6 years of experien...
Join the Mendocino County District Attorney s Office and work in Mendocino County home to redwoods, vineyards and picturesque coastline. ...
MELICK & PORTER, LLP PROMOTES CONNECTICUT PARTNERS HOLLY ROGERS, STEVEN BANKS, and ALEXANDER AHRENS