Works matching Probable cause
1
- Creighton Law Review, 2024, v. 57, n. 2, p. 391
- Article
2
- Creighton Law Review, 2021, v. 54, n. 2, p. 323
- Article
3
- George Washington Law Review, 2020, v. 88, n. 2, p. 269
- Article
4
- University of Miami Law Review, 2011, v. 65, n. 4, p. 1159
- Article
5
- Journal of Empirical Legal Studies, 2011, v. 8, p. 72, doi. 10.1111/j.1740-1461.2011.01230.x
- Rachlinski, Jeffrey J.;
- Guthrie, Chris;
- Wistrich, Andrew J.
- Article
6
- Loyola of Los Angeles Law Review, 2012, v. 45, n. 3, p. 985
- Article
7
- Hofstra Law Review, 2015, v. 43, n. 4, p. 1189
- Article
8
- Utah Bar Journal, 2020, v. 33, n. 5, p. 12
- Article
9
- St. Thomas Law Review, 2021, v. 33, n. 2, p. 283
- Article
10
- Lewis & Clark Law Review, 2013, v. 17, n. 3, p. 789
- Article
11
- Stanford Law Review, 2014, v. 66, n. 5, p. 987
- Article
12
- Boston College Law Review, 2019, v. 60, n. 1, p. 218
- Article
13
- Journal of Criminal Law & Criminology, 2013, v. 103, n. 3, p. 839
- Article
14
- University of Chicago Legal Forum, 2016, p. 809
- Article
15
- Duquesne Law Review, 2018, v. 56, n. 1, p. 107
- Article
16
- Iowa Law Review, 2020, v. 105, n. 2, p. 687
- Article
17
- Boston College Journal of Law & Social Justice, 2016, v. 36, n. 2, p. 287
- Article
18
- Georgia Law Review, 2017, v. 51, n. 2, p. 607
- Article
19
- North Dakota Law Review, 2013, v. 89, n. 4, p. 729
- Article
20
- Michigan Law Review, 2019, v. 118, n. 3, p. 507, doi. 10.36644/mlr.118.3.forensic
- Article
21
- Michigan Law Review, 2016, v. 115, n. 1, p. 109
- Article
22
- Washburn Law Journal, 2019, v. 58, n. 3, p. 769
- Article
23
- Pace Law Review, 2016, v. 36, n. 3, p. 970, doi. 10.58948/2331-3528.1931
- Article
24
- Gonzaga Law Review, 2012, v. 48, n. 2, p. 431
- Article
25
- Hofstra Law Review, 2020, v. 49, n. 1, p. 187
- Article
26
- Columbia Human Rights Law Review, 2013, v. 44, n. 2, p. 537
- Article
27
- Indiana Law Review, 2023, v. 56, n. 2, p. 391, doi. 10.18060/27226
- Article
28
- Tennessee Bar Journal, 2015, v. 51, n. 10, p. 22
- Article
29
- Washington & Lee Law Review, 2011, v. 68, n. 4, p. 1875
- Article
30
- Languages, 2023, v. 8, n. 4, p. 259, doi. 10.3390/languages8040259
- Article
31
- Law, Probability & Risk, 2018, v. 17, n. 3, p. 225, doi. 10.1093/lpr/mgy010
- Baucum, Matthew;
- Scurich, Nicholas;
- John, Richard S
- Article
32
- Journal of Digital Forensics, Security & Law, 2014, v. 9, n. 2, p. 197
- Losavio, Michael;
- Keeling, Deborah
- Article
33
- Michigan Law Review, 2008, v. 107, n. 1, p. 111
- Article
34
- Valparaiso University Law Review, 2018, v. 52, n. 2, p. 231
- Article
35
- William & Mary Law Review, 2024, v. 65, n. 6, p. 1349
- Article
36
- Environmental Health Perspectives, 2011, v. 119, n. 11, p. A469, doi. 10.1289/ehp.1104201
- Erren, Thomas C.;
- Groβ, J. Valérie;
- Morfeld, Peter
- Article
37
- North Carolina Law Review, 2021, v. 99, n. 2, p. 379
- RAVENELL, TERESSA;
- ROSS III, RILEY H.
- Article
38
- Creighton Law Review, 2024, v. 57, n. 1, p. 91
- Article
39
- Vanderbilt Law Review, 2017, v. 70, n. 6, p. 1249
- Article
40
- Vanderbilt Law Review, 2017, v. 70, n. 4, p. 1249
- Article
41
- UMKC Law Review, 2014, v. 82, n. 3, p. 663
- Article
42
- University of Michigan Journal of Law Reform, 2019, v. 52, n. 4, p. 615, doi. 10.36646/mjlr.52.3.quantum
- Article
43
- Journal of Wildlife Management, 2009, v. 73, n. 1, p. 89, doi. 10.2193/2007-589
- ROBINSON, AARON C.;
- LARSEN, RANDY T.;
- FLINDERS, JERRAN T.;
- MITCHELL, DEAN L.
- Article
44
- California Law Review, 1965, v. 53, n. 3, p. 840, doi. 10.2307/3479240
- Article
45
- Potchefstroom Electronic Law Journal, 2013, v. 16, n. 1, p. 241, doi. 10.4314/pelj.v16i1.8
- Article
46
- Yale Law Journal, 2020, v. 129, n. 5, p. 1296
- Article
47
- Arizona Law Review, 2015, v. 57, n. 4, p. 1139
- Article
48
- George Washington Law Review Arguendo, 2020, v. 88, n. 2, p. 269
- Article
49
- Loyola of Los Angeles Law Review, 2011, v. 44, n. 2, p. 773
- Article
50
- Law & Contemporary Problems, 2010, v. 73, n. 3, p. 69
- Article