LEADER 00760nam0-2200277 --450 001 9910292833303321 005 20181130132621.0 010 $a978-88-430-4804-5 100 $a20181130d2009----kmuy0itay5050 ba 101 0 $aita 102 $aIT 105 $a 001yy 200 1 $aChe cos'è la possibilità$fAndrea Borghini 210 $aRoma$cCarocci editore$d2009 215 $a111 p.$d20 cm 225 1 $a<>bussole$v340 610 0 $aPossibile 676 $a121.2$v21$zita 700 1$aBorghini,$bAndrea$f<1977->$0268717 801 0$aIT$bUNINA$gREICAT$2UNIMARC 901 $aBK 912 $a9910292833303321 952 $aCOLLEZ. 1952 (340)$b2938/2018$fFSPBC 959 $aFSPBC 996 $aChe cos'è la possibilità$993487 997 $aUNINA LEADER 01185nam a2200277 i 4500 001 991001826709707536 005 20020507152301.0 008 990722s1998 it ||| | ita 020 $a8814070482 035 $ab11569682-39ule_inst 035 $aLE02725856$9ExL 040 $aDip.to Studi Giuridici$bita 084 $aC-VI/A 100 1 $aGiostra, Glauco$0227712 245 10$aCostituzione, diritto e processo penale :$bi quarant'anni della corte costituzionale :$batti del Convegno, Macerata, 28 e 29 gennaio 1997 /$ca cura di Glauco Giostra e Gaetano Insolera 260 $aMilano :$bA. Giuffrè,$c1998 300 $axii, 206 p. ;$c24 cm. 490 0 $aPubblicazioni della Facoltà di giurisprudenza, Università di Macerata. 2. serie ;$v91 650 4$aProcesso penale$xGiurisprudenza costituzionale$xCongressi 700 1 $aInsolera, Gaetano 907 $a.b11569682$b01-03-17$c02-07-02 912 $a991001826709707536 945 $aLE027 C-VI/A 58$g1$i2027000200443$lle027$o-$pE0.00$q-$rl$s- $t0$u3$v2$w3$x0$y.i11773984$z02-07-02 996 $aCostituzione, diritto e processo penale$9895717 997 $aUNISALENTO 998 $ale027$b01-01-99$cm$da $e-$fita$git $h0$i1 LEADER 02690nam 2200589 450 001 9910806113603321 005 20230803205534.0 010 $a1-59332-792-7 035 $a(CKB)3710000000259936 035 $a(EBL)1812569 035 $a(SSID)ssj0001349821 035 $a(PQKBManifestationID)12433439 035 $a(PQKBTitleCode)TC0001349821 035 $a(PQKBWorkID)11402918 035 $a(PQKB)10131154 035 $a(MiAaPQ)EBC1812569 035 $a(Au-PeEL)EBL1812569 035 $a(CaPaEBR)ebr10951599 035 $a(OCoLC)892910414 035 $a(EXLCZ)993710000000259936 100 $a20141018h20142014 uy 0 101 0 $aeng 135 $aur|n|---||||| 181 $ctxt 182 $cc 183 $acr 200 10$aDialogue among state supreme courts $eadvancing state constitutionalism /$fMark W. Denniston 210 1$aEl Paso, Texas :$cLFB Scholarly Publishing LLC,$d2014. 210 4$d©2014 215 $a1 online resource (231 p.) 225 0 $aLaw and Society : Recent Scholarship 300 $aDescription based upon print version of record. 311 $a1-59332-759-5 320 $aIncludes bibliographical references and index. 327 $aDescribing dialogue -- Ohio case study -- Developing a nine state research design -- Reporting the empirical results -- Sister state dialogue and the good faith exception -- Interviews with state supreme court justices -- Challenges and future research. 330 $aState supreme courts use state constitutional provisions to afford their citizens state constitutional rights beyond the protections that the U.S. Supreme Court has interpreted the U.S. Constitution to require. As state supreme courts consider expanding state constitutional rights they engage in an ongoing dialogue with their sister state supreme courts. Results indicate this dialogue amongst state supreme courts influences decisions interpreting state constitutional rights. Denniston demonstrates through analysis of state supreme court decisions and interviews with state supreme court justice 410 0$aLaw and Society 606 $aConstitutional law$zUnited States$xStates$vCases 606 $aCourts of last resort$zUnited States$xStates 606 $aJudicial process$zUnited States$xStates 615 0$aConstitutional law$xStates 615 0$aCourts of last resort$xStates. 615 0$aJudicial process$xStates. 676 $a342.7308 700 $aDenniston$b Mark W.$f1975-$01599447 801 0$bMiAaPQ 801 1$bMiAaPQ 801 2$bMiAaPQ 906 $aBOOK 912 $a9910806113603321 996 $aDialogue among state supreme courts$93922142 997 $aUNINA