Search results
Results From The WOW.Com Content Network
In jurisprudence, selective prosecution is a procedural defense in which defendants argue that they should not be held criminally liable for breaking the law because the criminal justice system discriminated against them by choosing to prosecute. In claims of selective prosecution, defendants essentially argue that it is irrelevant whether they ...
Such cases have come to comprise a substantial portion of the Supreme Court's docket. ... Selective prosecution. McCleskey v. Kemp, 481 U.S. 279 (1987)
United States v. Armstrong, 517 U.S. 456 (1996), was a case heard by the Supreme Court of the United States in which the court held that the burden of proof for selective prosecution rests with the defendant, who must show the government declined to prosecute similarly situated suspects of other races.
In her second move since resuming control over Donald Trump's federal election interference case, Judge Tanya Chutkan denied the former president's motion to dismiss the case based on selective ...
(1) Whether the State's suppression of the key prosecution witness's admission he was under the care of a psychiatrist and failure to correct that witness's false testimony about that care and related diagnosis violate the due process of law. See Brady v. Maryland, 373 U.S. 83 (1963); Napue v. Illinois, 360 U.S. 264 (1959); and
Selective enforcement has become a topic of great discussion in the illegal immigration debate. The 2011 "Morton Memo" [7] laid out enforcement priorities for the U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement, and was intended to channel limited resources into prioritized pursuit of cases involving criminals and felons. It was interpreted as the ...
“This is a case of selective prosecution and an arbitrary enforcement of the statute,” said Brown in the brief hearing. “The young lady sent a picture of her breasts to my client, and they ...
Case history; Prior: 361 F.3d 849 (5th Cir. 2004); cert. granted, 542 U.S. 936 (2004). Holding; The prosecution in the capital trial of Miller-El violated the Fourteenth Amendment as interpreted in Batson v. Kentucky when it racially discriminated against black potential jurors, and Miller-El is entitled to habeas corpus relief. Court membership