enow.com Web Search

Search results

  1. Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
  2. Timbs v. Indiana - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Timbs_v._Indiana

    Timbs v. Indiana, 586 U.S. 146 (2019), was a United States Supreme Court case in which the Court considered whether the excessive fines clause of the Constitution's Eighth Amendment applies to state and local governments.

  3. Eighth Amendment to the United States Constitution - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eighth_Amendment_to_the...

    The Supreme Court has held that the Excessive Fines Clause prohibits fines that are "so grossly excessive as to amount to a deprivation of property without due process of law". The Court struck down a fine as excessive for the first time in United States v. Bajakajian (1998). Under the Excessive Bail Clause, the Supreme Court has held that the ...

  4. Category:Excessive Fines Clause case law - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Excessive_Fines...

    This page was last edited on 27 November 2011, at 03:27 (UTC).; Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 License; additional terms may apply.

  5. United States v. Bajakajian - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_v._Bajakajian

    United States v. Bajakajian, 524 U.S. 321 (1998), is a U.S. Supreme Court case holding that asset forfeiture is unconstitutional when it is "grossly disproportional to the gravity of the defendant’s offense", citing the Excessive Fines clause of the Eighth Amendment. [1]

  6. Browning-Ferris Industries of Vermont, Inc. v. Kelco Disposal ...

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Browning-Ferris_Industries...

    Browning-Ferris Industries v. Kelco Disposal, 492 U.S. 257 (1989), was a case in which the Supreme Court of the United States held that the Eighth Amendment's prohibition of unreasonable fines does not apply to punitive-damage awards in civil cases when the United States is not a party.

  7. Austin v. United States - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Austin_v._United_States

    Case history; Prior: United States v. One Parcel of Prop. Located at 508 Depot St., 964 F.2d 814 (8th Cir. 1992); cert. granted, 506 U.S. 1074 (1993). Holding; Forfeiture under §§881(a)(4) and (a)(7) is a monetary punishment and, as such, is subject to the limitations of the Excessive Fines Clause. Court membership; Chief Justice William ...

  8. Robinson v. California - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robinson_v._California

    Robinson v. California, 370 U.S. 660 (1962), is the first landmark decision of the United States Supreme Court in which the Eighth Amendment of the Constitution was interpreted to prohibit criminalization of particular acts or conduct, as contrasted with prohibiting the use of a particular form of punishment for a crime.

  9. Cooper Industries, Inc. v. Leatherman Tool Group, Inc.

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cooper_Industries,_Inc._v...

    While Furman confirmed the earlier incorporation of the 8th Amendment's Cruel and Unusual Punishment clause in Robinson v. California, 370 U.S. 660, 667 (1962) Cooper Industries v. Leatherman Tool Group incorporated the Excessive Fines clause. The Court later seemed to back away from this holding.