145,561 research outputs found
Interview with Aurora V. Diaz
No full textAurora V. Diaz talks about schools, churches and entertainment. She was born 13 January 1895, in Camargo, Tamaulipas, Mexico.https://scholarworks.utrgv.edu/rgvoralhistories/1090/thumbnail.jp
New (Probabilistic) Derivation of Diaz-Metcalf and Pólya-Szegő Inequalities and Consequences
No full textClassical inequalities of Diaz - Metcalf and Pólya - Szegő are generalized to
probabilistic setting which covers the initial deterministic (both discrete and integral) variants.
From these two inequalities, by the probabilistic derivation method further well -
known inequalities are obtained (that ones by Kantorovich, Rennie and Schweitzer)
Alphonso V. Diaz, head and shoulders portrait
No full textAlphonso V. Diaz, Purdue's executive vice president for business and financ
Jose Vega Diaz Oral History Interview
No full textThis is an oral history interview with Jose Vega Diaz, a longtime resident of Ybor City. Diaz was born in Cuba in 1884 and came to Ybor City with his family in 1892. At age twelve he began learning the cigar trade, and he worked in various factories until 1926. Diaz discusses the cigar trade and its practices, including the custom of the lector, or reader, and describes three of the strikes in which he and other workers participated
Perez-Diaz V., Estructura social des campo y exodo rural.
No full textCornu Roger. Perez-Diaz V., Estructura social des campo y exodo rural.. In: Revue française de sociologie, 1967, 8-2. p. 263
V. Guerra, Diaz & Co.
No full textA large ornamental cigar brand with various flower and vine designs in gold and red.https://digitalcommons.usf.edu/osterweil/2598/thumbnail.jp
Melendez-Diaz v. Massachusetts: The Future of the Confrontation Clause
No full textThe purpose of this article is to show the error in the majorities’ decision in Melendez-Diaz by approaching the issue from two perspectives. First, by investigating the cases and legal doctrines created by the Supreme Court in the years preceding Melendez-Diaz, this article will demonstrate why the case was erroneously decided. Second, this article explores the possibility that the majority decision was correct and thus the recently devised standard in Crawford v. Washington is inherently flawed. This article will further discuss the prior application of law before the Melendez-Diaz decision, offer analysis on the string of cases that led to the Melendez-Diaz decision, and evaluate where the law went wrong. Finally, this article will introduce a revised legal doctrine on what should be considered testimonial evidence against an accused based upon sound policy considerations and the Sixth Amendment rights of the accused
Recommended from our members
Melendez-Diaz v. Massachusetts: The Revolution Revitalized
No full textIn the well-known Crawford decision, the United States Supreme Court severed the relationship between the hearsay rule and the right of confrontation by limiting the scope of the Confrontation Clause of the Sixth Amendment to "testimonial" statements. In subsequent decision, the Court appeared to retreat from this anti-fusionist stance. In 2009 in Massacusetts v. Melendez-Diaz the majority opinion restated and strengthened the revolution promised by Crawford. This essay, which will appear sometime in 2010 as § 6371.4 of 30A Wright and Graham, Federal Practice and Procedure: Evidence (Supplement 2010) analyzes the Melendez-Diaz majority opinion in light of the briefs, the oral argument, and the fallout from the Court's prior confrontation decisions
Recommended from our members
\u3ci\u3eUnited States v. Diaz\u3c/i\u3e: The Gap Between Medication and Restoration
No full textIn United States v. Diaz, the United States Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit, in a case of first impression, determined whether the state met its burden in applying the United States Supreme Court\u27s test articulated in Sell v. United States, to involuntarily medicate an incompetent, schizophrenic defendant. Based on the Sell test that was established in 2003, the court of appeals had to determine which evidentiary findings were sufficient to meet the clear and convincing evidence standard allowing the State of Georgia to forcibly medicate the appellant, Michael Diaz. The court of appeals found no clear error in the United States District Court for the Northern District of Georgia\u27s decision to involuntarily medicate Diaz based on evidence of Diaz\u27s uncooperative behavior and testimony concerning the effectiveness of alternatives. While involuntary medication may be Diaz\u27s only chance at restoring trial competency, the Eleventh Circuit ultimately made its decision based on impersonal statistics lacking any practical guidelines
\u3ci\u3eUnited States v. Diaz\u3c/i\u3e: The Gap Between Medication and Restoration
No full textIn United States v. Diaz, the United States Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit, in a case of first impression, determined whether the state met its burden in applying the United States Supreme Court\u27s test articulated in Sell v. United States, to involuntarily medicate an incompetent, schizophrenic defendant. Based on the Sell test that was established in 2003, the court of appeals had to determine which evidentiary findings were sufficient to meet the clear and convincing evidence standard allowing the State of Georgia to forcibly medicate the appellant, Michael Diaz. The court of appeals found no clear error in the United States District Court for the Northern District of Georgia\u27s decision to involuntarily medicate Diaz based on evidence of Diaz\u27s uncooperative behavior and testimony concerning the effectiveness of alternatives. While involuntary medication may be Diaz\u27s only chance at restoring trial competency, the Eleventh Circuit ultimately made its decision based on impersonal statistics lacking any practical guidelines
- …
