enow.com Web Search

Search results

  1. Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
  2. Employment Division v. Smith - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Employment_Division_v._Smith

    Employment Division, Department of Human Resources of Oregon v. Smith, 494 U.S. 872 (1990), is a United States Supreme Court case that held that the state could deny unemployment benefits to a person fired for violating a state prohibition on the use of peyote even though the use of the drug was part of a religious ritual. Although states have ...

  3. Sohappy v. Smith - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sohappy_v._Smith

    Sohappy v. Smith, 302 F. Supp. 899 (D. Or. 1969), [1] was a federal case heard by the United States District Court for the District of Oregon, decided in 1969 and amended in 1975. It began with fourteen members of the Yakama who sued the U.S. state of Oregon over its fishing regulations.

  4. List of United States Supreme Court cases by the Roberts Court

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_United_States...

    Summary Cavazos v. Smith: 10-1115: 2011-10-31 A jury found that a grandmother was guilty of assaulting her 7-week-old grandchild, which the jury found had died of shaken baby syndrome. The Supreme Court held that the Ninth Circuit exceeded its authority under 28 U.S.C. § 2254(d) in reversing the verdict for insufficient evidence. KPMG LLP v ...

  5. United States v. Oregon - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_v._Oregon

    A case that was combined with Sohappy v. Smith (302 F.Supp. 899), a 1969 United States federal district court case concerning fishing rights of Native Americans. (See United States v. Washington for further info.) Gonzales v. Oregon, a 2006 United States Supreme Court case in which the United States Department of Justice unsuccessfully ...

  6. Fuller v. Oregon - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fuller_v._Oregon

    Fuller v. Oregon , 417 U.S. 40 (1974), was a United States Supreme Court case in which the Court held that Oregon's statute allowing for the recoupment of costs related to court-appointed defense counsel did not violate either the Fourteenth Amendment 's Equal Protection Clause or the Sixth Amendment 's Assistance of Counsel Clause .

  7. NYT ‘Connections’ Hints and Answers Today, Wednesday, December 11

    www.aol.com/nyt-connections-hints-answers-today...

    today's connections game answers for wednesday, december 11, 2024: 1. utopia: paradise, seventh heaven, shangri-la, xanadu 2. things you shake: hairspray, magic 8 ...

  8. College Football Playoff bracket: Oregon leads 12-team field ...

    www.aol.com/college-football-playoff-bracket...

    Oregon, Georgia, Boise State and Arizona State claimed the top four seeds while SMU edged out Alabama for the final at-large spot in the debut 12-team College Football Playoff.

  9. Smith v. United States (1993) - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Smith_v._United_States_(1993)

    Smith v. United States, 508 U.S. 223 (1993), is a United States Supreme Court case that held that the exchange of a gun for drugs constituted "use" of the firearm for purposes of a federal statute imposing penalties for "use" of a firearm "during and in relation to" a drug trafficking crime.