Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
United States v. Williams , 504 U.S. 36 (1992), was a U.S. Supreme Court case concerning the presentation of exculpatory evidence to a grand jury . It ruled that the federal courts do not have the supervisory power to require prosecutors to present exculpatory evidence to the grand jury.
Srinivasa Ramanujan mentioned the sums in a 1918 paper. [1] In addition to the expansions discussed in this article, Ramanujan's sums are used in the proof of Vinogradov's theorem that every sufficiently large odd number is the sum of three primes. [2]
In mathematics, a character sum is a sum () of values of a Dirichlet character χ modulo N, taken over a given range of values of n.Such sums are basic in a number of questions, for example in the distribution of quadratic residues, and in particular in the classical question of finding an upper bound for the least quadratic non-residue modulo N.
Ramanujan summation is a technique invented by the mathematician Srinivasa Ramanujan for assigning a value to divergent infinite series.Although the Ramanujan summation of a divergent series is not a sum in the traditional sense, it has properties that make it mathematically useful in the study of divergent infinite series, for which conventional summation is undefined.
The Williams Rule is based on the holding in the Florida state case of Williams v. State [1] in which relevant evidence of collateral crimes is admissible at jury trial when it does not go to prove the "bad character" or "criminal propensity" of the defendant but is used to show motive, intent, knowledge, modus operandi, or lack of mistake.
Williams rolled down the window instead; Connoly then reached inside and removed a loaded revolver from his waistband. Williams was arrested for illegally carrying a handgun; a search incident to arrest revealed heroin both inside the car and on his person. Other weapons included a second revolver and a machete inside the vehicle.
Williams v. Taylor, 529 U.S. 420 (2000), was a United States Supreme Court case concerning the interpretation of a provision of the Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996 (AEDPA). The case was argued on February 28, 2000, and decided on April 18, 2000.
Philip Morris USA v. Williams, 549 U.S. 346 (2007), 556 U.S. 178 (2009), was a decision by the Supreme Court of the United States, which held that the due process clause of the Fourteenth Amendment limits punitive damages, and ordered a lower court to reconsider its damages awards on that basis.