Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
Williams v. Illinois, 567 U.S. 50 (2012) was a United States Supreme Court case where it was ruled that having an expert witness testify on behalf of a third-party lab analyst does not violate the Sixth Amendment's Confrontation Clause as long as the results were not directed to prove guilt.
Williams v. Illinois, 399 U.S. 235 (1970), was a United States Supreme Court case in which the Court held that, if a person cannot afford to pay a fine, it violates the Equal Protection Clause to convert that unpaid fine into jail time to extend a person's incarceration beyond a statutory maximum length.
Chicago, Burlington & Quincy Railroad Co. v. City of Chicago, 166 U.S. 226 (1897), was a ruling that determined the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment required states to provide just compensation for seizing private property. [1]
Withrow v. Williams: 235 Illinois Brick Co. v. Illinois: 236 Ex parte Grossman: 237 Scribner v. Straus: 238 First English Evangelical Lutheran Church v. Los Angeles County: 239 Inter-Island Steam Navigation Co. v. Ward: 240 Immigration and Naturalization Service v. Stevic: 241 Anderson County Commissioners v. Beal: 242 Nguyen v. INS: 243 ...
The four suspects were tried in 1978. A witness, Charles McCraney, claimed to have seen Williams, Rainge and Adams near the crime scene area in Ford Heights (at the time called East Chicago Heights) at the time of the crime. A state expert witness, Michael Podlecki, said that at least one of the rapists was type A secretor blood (shared by 25% ...
Illinois v. Wardlow , 528 U.S. 119 (2000), is a case decided before the United States Supreme Court involving U.S. criminal procedure regarding searches and seizures . Background
Mēdüzā Mediterrania in New York City, New York ranks No. 1 on Yelp's Best New Restaurants of 2024. Celebrities like Taylor Swift and Cardi B have dined at the restaurant.
Williams & Wilkins Co. v. United States, 487 F.2d 1345 (Ct. Cl. 1973), was an important intellectual property decision by the federal Court of Claims, later affirmed by a per curiam opinion from an evenly divided United States Supreme Court, with only eight justices voting (Harry Blackmun took no part in the decision of this case).