Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
Klopfer v. North Carolina, 386 U.S. 213 (1967), was a decision by the United States Supreme Court involving the application of the Speedy Trial Clause of the United States Constitution in state court proceedings.
Tennessee v. Federal Communications Commission, 832 F.3d 597 (2016), was a ruling of the United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit, [1] holding that the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) does not have the authority to preempt states from enforcing "anti-expansion" statutes that prohibit local municipal broadband networks from being expanded into nearby communities.
Second, it recognizes the difficulty of proving improper motive in many cases. [11] The Supreme Court has found a presumption of vindictiveness to apply where is defendant is charged or indicted, exercises his right to a trial de novo, and the prosecutor subsequently increases the charges against the defendant. [10]
After the Fifth and Sixth Circuit Courts of Appeal denied the administration's request to put a stay on the injunctions, the Department of Education turned to the Supreme Court, arguing that some ...
Established on December 10, 1869 by the Judiciary Act of 1869 as a circuit judgeship for the Sixth Circuit Reassigned to the United States Circuit Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit by the Judiciary Act of 1891: Jackson: TN: 1891–1893 Lurton: TN: 1893–1909 Knappen: MI: 1910–1924 Moorman: KY: 1925–1938 Hamilton: KY: 1938–1945 S ...
The district appealed the verdict to the Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals. In late 1975, the appellate court affirmed all of Hogan's decision [10] save for attorney's fees, which per the Supreme Court's recent decision in Alyeska Pipeline Co. v. Wilderness Society [11] it believed were not a permissible award in the case. [5]
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit has existed for 131 years but has never included a Black The post After 131 years, a Black man will be a judge on the U.S. Court of Appeals for the ...
Spisak (552 U.S. 945, 2007) the Court remanded the case back to the Sixth Circuit and ordered the appeals court to reconsider in light of two recent cases, Schriro v. Landrigan (2007) [6] and Carey v. Musladin (2006). [7] The Sixth Court of Appeals again reinstated its earlier opinion. Again the State appealed and the Supreme Court granted review.