FN48: Difference between revisions
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
(New page: NJ Stats, Tit 2C § 20-23 b; BloomBecker, Computer Crime Laws § 2:42.) |
No edit summary |
||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
NJ Stats, Tit 2C § 20-23 b; BloomBecker, Computer Crime Laws § 2:42. | NJ Stats, Tit 2C § 20-23 b; BloomBecker, Computer Crime Laws § 2:42. | ||
Va C § 18.2-152.12. | |||
Documentation for EDP audit packages used to detect method of crime as subject of discovery is discussed in § 111. | |||
People v. Lugashi, 205 Cal. App. 3d 632, 252 Cal. Rptr. 434 (2d Dist. 1988); Bray v. Bi-State Development Corp., 949 S.W.2d 93 (Mo. Ct. App. E.D. 1997), reh'g and/or transfer denied, (July 14, 1997) and transfer denied, (Aug. 19, 1997). | |||
BloomBecker, Lessons from Wells Fargo, Computerworld p 19 (July 5, 1982). | |||
Latest revision as of 10:44, 5 March 2009
NJ Stats, Tit 2C § 20-23 b; BloomBecker, Computer Crime Laws § 2:42.
Va C § 18.2-152.12.
Documentation for EDP audit packages used to detect method of crime as subject of discovery is discussed in § 111.
People v. Lugashi, 205 Cal. App. 3d 632, 252 Cal. Rptr. 434 (2d Dist. 1988); Bray v. Bi-State Development Corp., 949 S.W.2d 93 (Mo. Ct. App. E.D. 1997), reh'g and/or transfer denied, (July 14, 1997) and transfer denied, (Aug. 19, 1997).
BloomBecker, Lessons from Wells Fargo, Computerworld p 19 (July 5, 1982).