enow.com Web Search

Search results

  1. Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
  2. Davis v. United States (2011) - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Davis_v._United_States_(2011)

    Davis v. United States , 564 U.S. 229 (2011), was a case in which the Supreme Court of the United States "[held] that searches conducted in objectively reasonable reliance on binding appellate precedent are not subject to the exclusionary rule ". [ 1 ]

  3. Davis v. United States - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Davis_v._United_States

    United States Supreme Court cases titled Davis v. United States: Davis v. United States, 589 U.S. ___ (2020), a per curiam opinion; Davis v. United States, 564 U.S. 229 (good-faith exception to the exclusionary rule) Davis v. United States, 512 U.S. 452 (invocation of the right to counsel under Miranda) Davis v.

  4. List of United States Supreme Court cases, volume 83

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_United_States...

    In 1874, the U.S. government created the United States Reports, and retroactively numbered older privately-published case reports as part of the new series. As a result, cases appearing in volumes 1–90 of U.S. Reports have dual citation forms; one for the volume number of U.S. Reports, and one for the volume number of the reports named for the relevant reporter of decisions (these are called ...

  5. Davis v. United States (1973) - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Davis_v._United_States_(1973)

    Davis v. United States, 411 U.S. 233 (1973), was a 1973 United States Supreme Court case concerning criminal procedure and collateral attacks on criminal convictions. The majority opinion, authored by then-Associate Justice William Rehnquist, held that when claims of unconstitutional jury discrimination are brought on postconviction collateral review, they are subject to the timeliness ...

  6. United States v. Davis (2019) - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_v._Davis_(2019)

    18 U.S.C. § 924(c) contains both an “elements clause” and a “residual clause.” [8] The elements clause defines an offense as a crime of violence if it “has as an element the use, attempted use, or threatened use of physical force against the person or property of another,” and the residual clause defines an offense as a crime of violence if it, “by its nature, involves a ...

  7. Davis v. United States (1994) - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Davis_v._United_States_(1994)

    Davis v. United States, 512 U.S. 452 (1994), was a United States Supreme Court case in which the Court established that the right to counsel can only be legally asserted by an "unambiguous or unequivocal request for counsel." [1] Legal scholars have criticized this case stating that the "bright line" rule established under Edwards v.

  8. AOL Mail

    mail.aol.com/?icid=aol.com-nav

    Get AOL Mail for FREE! Manage your email like never before with travel, photo & document views. Personalize your inbox with themes & tabs. You've Got Mail!

  9. United States v. Davis - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_v._Davis

    United States v. Davis may refer to: United States v. Davis, a U.S. Supreme Court opinion on tax treatment of divorce settlements; United States v. Davis, an 11th Circuit ruling on the need for a warrant to obtain cell phone location data; United States v. Davis, a U.S. Supreme Court opinion on the residual clause of the Hobbs Act