enow.com Web Search

Search results

  1. Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
  2. United States v. Davis (2019) - Wikipedia

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

    On appeal, the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit issued an opinion on January 31, 2017, denying both defendants’ challenges and affirming the district court’s judgment below. [2] The defendants petitioned the US Supreme Court for certiorari, and following the Court’s decision in Sessions v.

  3. 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 ]

  4. 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.

  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 - 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

  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. Davis v. Washington - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Davis_v._Washington

    Davis v. Washington, 547 U.S. 813 (2006), was a case decided by the Supreme Court of the United States and written by Justice Antonin Scalia that established the test used to determine whether a hearsay statement is "testimonial" for Confrontation Clause purposes. Two years prior to its publication, in Crawford v.

  9. United States v. Davis (1962) - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_v._Davis_(1962)

    United States v. Davis, 370 U.S. 65 (1962), is a federal income tax case argued before the United States Supreme Court in 1962, holding that a taxpayer recognizes a gain on the transfer of appreciated property in satisfaction of a legal obligation.