enow.com Web Search

Search results

  1. Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
  2. Aguilar v. Texas - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aguilar_v._Texas

    Aguilar v. Texas, 378 U.S. 108 (1964), was a decision by the United States Supreme Court, which held that "[a]lthough an affidavit supporting a search warrant may be based on hearsay information and need not reflect the direct personal observations of the affiant, the magistrate must be informed of some of the underlying circumstances relied on by the person providing the information and some ...

  3. DeVillier v. Texas - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Devillier_v._Texas

    Texas, 601 U.S. 285 (2024), was a case that the Supreme Court of the United States decided on April 16, 2024. [ 1 ] [ 2 ] The case dealt with the Supreme Court's takings clause jurisprudence . Because the case touched on whether or not the 5th Amendment is self-executing, the case had implications for Trump v.

  4. Laidlaw v. Organ - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Laidlaw_v._Organ

    Organ, 15 U.S. (2 Wheat.) 178 (1817), is a case decided by the Supreme Court of the United States that established the rule that buyers need not disclose advantageous information to sellers. This rule should not be confused with either caveat emptor —a rule placing the burden of due diligence on the purchaser of goods—or caveat venditor ...

  5. Brown v. Texas - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brown_v._Texas

    Brown v. Texas, 443 U.S. 47 (1979), was a United States Supreme Court case in which the Court determined that the defendant's arrest in El Paso, Texas, for a refusal to identify himself, after being seen and questioned in a high crime area, was not based on a reasonable suspicion of wrongdoing and thus violated the Fourth Amendment.

  6. Washington v. Texas - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Washington_v._Texas

    Washington v. Texas, 388 U.S. 14 (1967), is a United States Supreme Court case in which the Court decided that the Compulsory Process Clause of the Sixth Amendment to the Constitution (guaranteeing the right of a criminal defendant to force the attendance of witnesses for their side) is applicable in state courts as well as federal courts. [1]

  7. Addington v. Texas - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Addington_v._Texas

    Addington v. Texas, 441 U.S. 418 (1979), was a landmark decision of the US Supreme Court that set the standard for involuntary commitment for treatment by raising the burden of proof required to commit persons for psychiatric treatment from the usual civil burden of proof of "preponderance of the evidence" to "clear and convincing evidence".

  8. Medellín v. Texas - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Medellín_v._Texas

    Medellín v. Texas, 552 U.S. 491 (2008), was a decision of the United States Supreme Court that held even when a treaty constitutes an international commitment, it is not binding domestic law unless it has been implemented by an act of the U.S. Congress or contains language expressing that it is "self-executing" upon ratification. [1]

  9. Hernandez v. Texas - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hernandez_v._Texas

    Texas, 347 U.S. 475 (1954), was a landmark case, "the first and only Mexican-American civil-rights case heard and decided by the United States Supreme Court during the post-World War II period." [ 1 ] In a unanimous ruling, the court held that Mexican Americans and all other nationality groups in the United States have equal protection under ...