Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
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 ...
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 ...
Coker v. Georgia, 433 U.S. 584 (1977) – The death penalty is unconstitutional for rape of an adult woman when the victim is not killed.; Enmund v. Florida, 458 U.S. 782 (1982) – The death penalty is unconstitutional for a person who is a minor participant in a felony and does not kill, attempt to kill, or intend to kill.
It begins with the 1905 court case Lochner v. New York, which found that a law forbidding bakers to work more than 60 hours a week, or 10 hours in a day, interfered with "right of contract." The ...
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.
McDonough v. Smith, 588 U.S. ___ (2019), was a United States Supreme Court case from the October 2018 term.In a 6–3 ruling, the Court held that the 3-year statute of limitations for a fabrication of evidence civil lawsuit under section 1983 of the Civil Rights Act begins to run when the criminal case ends in the plaintiff's favor.
Get AOL Mail for FREE! Manage your email like never before with travel, photo & document views. Personalize your inbox with themes & tabs. You've Got Mail!
Smith v. United States , 599 U.S. 236 (2023), is a United States Supreme Court case pertaining to Article III and the Sixth Amendment . The Court held that a defendant may be retried following a jury trial conducted in the improper venue before a jury drawn from the incorrect district.