Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
Weeks v. United States , 232 U.S. 383 (1914) was a United States Supreme Court case in which the Court unanimously held that the warrantless seizure of items from a private residence constitutes a violation of the Fourth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution . [ 1 ]
Stratton's Independence, Ltd. v. Howbert: 231 U.S. 399 (1913) Weeks v. United States: 232 U.S. 383 (1914) establishment of the exclusionary rule for illegally obtained evidence Ocampo v. United States: 234 U.S. 91 (1914) sometimes considered one of the Insular Cases: Shreveport Rate Case: 234 U.S. 342 (1914) Commerce clause, regulation of ...
The Act would have codified the ruling in United States v. Leon and expanded the good-faith exception to warrantless searches. [ 18 ] Under the Act, evidence would be admissible as long as the officer had an objectively reasonable belief that their actions were constitutional at the time of the search. [ 19 ]
Levi Weeks (1776–1819) was the accused in the infamous Manhattan Well Murder trial of 1800, the first murder trial in the United States for which there is a recorded transcript. [1] [2] At the time of the murder, Weeks was a young carpenter in New York City. He was the brother of Ezra Weeks, one of New York's most successful builders of the time.
Lorena W. Weeks (born 1929) was the plaintiff in an important sex discrimination case, Weeks v. Southern Bell (1969). She claimed that Southern Bell had violated her rights under the 1964 Civil Rights Act when they denied her application for promotion to a higher paying position because she was a woman.
Anderson v. Liberty Lobby, Inc., 477 U.S. 242 (1986) Set the standard for what parties must establish in evidence to be granted summary judgement in federal civil cases and how courts should evaluate those motions. Since such motions are extremely common, Anderson has become the most-cited Supreme Court case. Daubert v.
The majority reviewed the history of the exclusionary rule established in early 20th-century cases such as Weeks v. United States (1914) and Gouled v. United States, (1921) and applied to state courts in Mapp v. Ohio (1961). The exclusionary rule is not a right provided by the Constitution itself, it is a judicially-created prophylactic rule to ...
"The power of Congress over Indian Affairs may be of a plenary nature, but it is not absolute." US v. Alcea Band of Tillamooks, 329 U.S. 40 (1946), 329 U.S. 54. Since the exclusion of the Kansas Delawares from distribution under the act was "tied rationally to the fulfillment of Congress' unique obligation toward the Indians," 430 U.S. 85-89, the exclusion does not offend the Due Process ...