Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
Lester B. Orfield, A Resume of Decisions of the United States Supreme Court on Federal Criminal Procedure, 20 Neb. L. Rev. 251 (1941). Lester B. Orfield, A Resume of Supreme Court Decisions on Federal Criminal Procedure, 14 Rocky Mntn. L. Rev. 105 (1941).
Miranda v. Arizona, 384 U.S. 436 (1966), was a landmark decision of the U.S. Supreme Court in which the Court ruled that law enforcement in the United States must warn a person of their constitutional rights before interrogating them, or else the person's statements cannot be used as evidence at their trial.
Early case on the patentability of the business method patent: Hills v. Gautreaux: 425 U.S. 284 (1976) Fifth Amendment and Civil Rights Act of 1964: United States v. Miller (1976) 425 U.S. 435 (1976) Fourth Amendment regarding financial information Hampton v. United States: 425 U.S. 484 (1976) Entrapment and drug distribution Estelle v ...
Kennedy v. Bremerton School District, 597 U.S. 507 (2022) The firing of a public high school football coach for saying a prayer on the field violated his First Amendment rights. The Court announced that the Lemon test from the landmark case of Lemon v. Kurtzman (1971) had been abandoned by the Court in
Adamson v. California, 332 U.S. 46 (1947), was a United States Supreme Court case regarding the incorporation of the Fifth Amendment of the Bill of Rights. Its decision is part of a long line of cases that eventually led to the Selective Incorporation Doctrine.
Fourth Amendment, Fourteenth Amendment, Unconstitutionality of State issued general warrants Cox v. Louisiana: 379 U.S. 536 (1965) First Amendment, "breach of the peace" statutes Freedman v. Maryland: 380 U.S. 51 (1965) First Amendment, motion picture censorship United States v. Seeger: 380 U.S. 163 (1965) definition of religion for a military ...
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit cited Tinker in the 2013 court case Hardwick v. Heyward to rule that prohibiting a student from wearing Confederate flag shirt did not violate the First Amendment because there was evidence that the shirt could cause disruption. [17] Exceptions to this are the 2010 court case Defoe v.
Muniz, 496 US 582 (1990), is a U.S. Supreme Court case involving the Self-incrimination Clause of the 5th Amendment and the meaning of “testimonial” under the 5th Amendment. A drunk-driving suspect, Muniz, made several incriminating statements while in police custody, and the Supreme Court held that only one of these statements was ...