Cases

OPINION MEYER, Justice. The issue in this case is whether a juvenile court’s certification of the proceedings “for action under the laws and court procedures controlling adult criminal violations” is limited to the offense listed in the certification order. Minn.Stat. § 260B.125 (2010). The State filed a delinquency petition against 15-year-old appellant William Grigsby, alleging that Grigsby committed se

JOHNSON, Chief Judge (concurring specially). I concur in the opinion of the court but write separately to summarize an alternative analysis of the issue discussed in part IV. In his initial brief, Grigsby argues that he was deprived of the constitutional right to a meaningful opportunity to present a complete defense. He states the general principles of this constitutional right in a singl

PER CURIAM Defendant appeared voluntarily at an arraignment. At the arraignment, he read and signed a release agreement, which ordered him to appear in court on June 13, 2005. When that date arrived, defendant did not appear. He was charged with and convicted of first-degree failure to appear. ORS 162.205. At trial on that charge, defendant moved for a judgment of acquittal on the ground that the state had not established that

233 B.R. 558 (1999) In re William E. GRIGSBY, Debtor. Bankruptcy No. 99-31647-BKC-SHF. United States Bankruptcy Court, S.D. Florida. May 10, 1999. Thomas L. Abrams, Shapiro & Abrams, Plantation, FL, for Union Planters Realty Inc. Kurt M. Frim, Boca Raton, FL, for Debtor. ORDER AWARDING SANCTIONS AGAINST DEBTOR AND DEBTOR'S COUNSEL S

VANCE, Circuit Judge: This action arising under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 involves the failure to provide proper medical treatment to a county jail inmate. The defendants appeal from a jury verdict in favor of the plaintiff, Stephen Carswell. Carswell also appeals the district court’s application of Florida’s collateral source rule. For the reasons set forth below, we affirm the district

666 A.2d 503 (1995) STATE of Maine v. Stephen M. GRIGSBY. Supreme Judicial Court of Maine. Submitted on Briefs October 2, 1995. Decided October 20, 1995. *504 R. Christopher Almy, District Attorney, Jeffrey Silverstein, Assistant District Attorney, Bangor, for the State. Robert C. Granger, Roy, Beardsley & Williams, El

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA SCOTT D. GRIGSBY, Plaintiff, Case No. 18-cv-792 (JMC) v. DANIEL P. DRISCOLL, Secretary of the Army, 1 Defendant. MEMORANDUM OPINION Plaintiff Scott Grigsby challenges a decision by the Army Board for Correction of Milit

PER CURIAM: William Cordova, Jose Gutierrez, and Melvin Sorto appeal their convictions for conspiracy, violent crimes in aid of racketeering, murder, assault, and federal and District of Columbia weapons offenses. They raise eight claims, four of which we address here; the others we address in a judgment issued contemporaneously with this opinion. Finding none of the challenge

Grigsby v Francabandiero (2017 NY Slip Op 05539) Grigsby v Francabandiero 2017 NY Slip Op 05539 Decided on July 7, 2017 Appellate Division, Fourth Department Published by New York State Law Reporting Bureau pursuant to

WELBAUM, J. {¶ 1} Defendant-appellant, Dustin Grigsby, appeals from his conviction and sentence in the Miamisburg Municipal Court after pleading guilty to one count of unlawful sexual conduct with a minor. In support of his appeal, Grigsby contends that the trial court erred in ordering him to register as a sex offender because his offense was charged as a first-degree misdemeanor and t

[Cite as State v. Grigsby, 2013-Ohio-2300.] COURT OF APPEALS LICKING COUNTY, OHIO FIFTH APPELLATE DISTRICT JUDGES: STATE OF OHIO : Hon. W. Scott Gwin, P.J. : Hon. William B. Hoffman, J. Plaintiff-Appellee :

FOR PUBLICATION UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT DAVID GRIGSBY; JOSEPH SHEPARD, No. 19-55042 On Behalf of Themselves and All Others Similarly Situated, D.C. No. Plaintiffs-Appellants, 3:17-cv-00667- GPC-KSC and BAR MANDALEVY; DAVID SIEBERT, OPINION Plaintiffs, v. BOFI HOLDING, INC.; GREGOR

MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER EISELE, Chief Judge. Pending before the Court is the Respondents’ “Motion for Stay Pending Appeal.” The merits of the death qualification issues appear clear enough.1 Before elabo*630rate and exhaustive attention is given to one of the possible penalties, death, the focus

649 S.W.2d 404 (1983) 8 Ark.App. 188 Royce GRIGSBY, Appellant, v. William F. EVERETT, Director of Labor, and Ideal Distributing Company, Appellees. No. E 82-329. Court of Appeals of Arkansas. May 4, 1983. *405 Pickens, Boyce, McLarty & Watson by James A. McLarty, Newport, for appellant. Friday,

628 F.3d 354 (2010) Brian D. GRIGSBY, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Ray LAHOOD, Secretary of the United States Department of Transportation, Defendant-Appellee. No. 10-1072. United States Court of Appeals, Seventh Circuit. Argued September 17, 2010. Decided December 6, 2010. *356 Michael C. Kendall (argued), Kendall La

869 F.Supp. 984 (1994) GRIGSBY BRANDFORD & CO., INC. and A.H. Williams & Co., Inc., Plaintiffs, v. UNITED STATES of America, and Richard W. Riley, Secretary of Education, Defendants. Civ. A. No. 94-2012. United States District Court, District of Columbia. November 28, 1994. *985

569 F.Supp. 1273 (1983) James T. GRIGSBY, Petitioner, v. James MABRY, Commissioner, Arkansas Department of Correction, Respondent. Dewayne HULSEY, Petitioner, v. Willis SARGENT, Superintendent of the Cummins Unit Penitentiary, Grady, Arkansas, Respondent. Ardia McCREE, Petitioner, v. Vernon HOUSEWRIGHT, Director, Arkansas Department of Correction, Respondent. Nos. PB-C-78-32, PB-C-81-2 and PB-C-80-429

This is an appeal by the plaintiffs from a summary judgment entered in favor of the defendant on a complaint alleging fraud and misrepresentation by the defendant about a tract of land sold by him to the plaintiff. We affirm. The complaint alleged that the defendant misrepresented that the tract of land bought by the plaintiffs was part of a commercial subdivision which was restricted to commercial use. The complaint alleged that the representation was made on or about A

SEXTON, Judge. The defendant was charged with aggravated rape of his wife’s ten year old daughter in violation of LSA-R.S. 14:42. By a plea bargain agreement, the defendant plead guilty to the responsive charge of forcible rape, LSA-R.S. 14:42.1. He was sentenced to eighteen years imprisonment at hard labor. On appeal, the defendant objects to the sentence as excessive. At sentencing the trial judge relie

HEANEY, Circuit Judge, concurring. I agree with Judge Lay that defendants in capital cases have a right to prove that death-qualified jurors are more prone to conviction than jurors who are not so qualified, and to further prove that the jury in this case was so qualified. I also agree with him that if these facts are established, Grigsby must be granted a new trial. While I would prefer