enow.com Web Search

Search results

  1. Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
  2. Padilla v. Kentucky - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Padilla_v._Kentucky

    Padilla v. Commonwealth of Kentucky, 559 U.S. 356 (2010), is a case in which the United States Supreme Court decided that criminal defense attorneys must advise noncitizen clients about the deportation risks of a guilty plea.

  3. Donoghue v Stevenson - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Donoghue_v_Stevenson

    Donoghue v Stevenson [1932] AC 562 was a landmark court decision in Scots delict law and English tort law by the House of Lords.It laid the foundation of the modern law of negligence in common law jurisdictions worldwide, as well as in Scotland, establishing general principles of the duty of care.

  4. Chaidez v. United States - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chaidez_v._United_States

    Chaidez v. United States, 568 U.S. 342 (2013), was a United States Supreme Court case that determined that the ruling in Padilla v. Commonwealth of Kentucky could not be applied retroactively, because the Padilla case applied a new rule to the Sixth Amendment to the United States Constitution. [1]

  5. Batson v. Kentucky - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Batson_v._Kentucky

    Batson v. Kentucky, 476 U.S. 79 (1986), was a landmark decision of the United States Supreme Court ruling that a prosecutor's use of a peremptory challenge in a criminal case—the dismissal of jurors without stating a valid cause for doing so—may not be used to exclude jurors based solely on their race.

  6. Criminal law in the Taney Court - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Criminal_law_in_the_Taney...

    In Kentucky v. Dennison (1861), the Court denied another mandamus petition, holding that—even though the Extradition Clause of the Constitution obliged states to extradite criminals to other states for trial—this provision was not enforceable in the federal courts. [31] Dennison was overruled by Puerto Rico v. Branstad (1987). [32]

  7. Kentucky v. Stincer - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kentucky_v._Stincer

    Kentucky v. Stincer , 482 U.S. 730 (1987), was a United States Supreme Court case in which the Court held that the respondent's rights under the Confrontation Clause of the Sixth Amendment were not violated by his exclusion from the competency hearing.

  8. United States v. Forty Barrels and Twenty Kegs of Coca-Cola

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_v._Forty...

    Adulterated": The decision, delivered by Justice Hughes, states that the intent of the word "added" in the context of the Act did not exclude the ingredients of a formula "sold under some fanciful name which would be distinctive" if any were found deleterious and was included to protect natural foodstuffs from prosecution because of constituent ...

  9. Braden v. 30th Judicial Circuit Court of Kentucky - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Braden_v._30th_Judicial...

    Braden v. 30th Judicial Circuit Court of Kentucky, 410 U.S. 484 (1973), was a decision of the US Supreme Court regarding the statutory jurisdiction of federal district courts to grant writs of habeas corpus for guaranteeing the right of state prisoners to receive a speedy trial in another state under the Speedy Trial Clause of the Sixth Amendment to the US Constitution.