Search results
Results From The WOW.Com Content Network
appeal from the United States District Court for the Middle District of Pennsylvania (M.D. Pa.) judgment reversed Gillis v. California: 293 U.S. 62 (1934) McReynolds 9-0 none none certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit (9th Cir.) judgment affirmed McCandless v. Furlaud: 293 U.S. 67 (1934) Brandeis 9-0 none none
United States v. Ramirez, 523 U.S. 65 (1998), was a case before the United States Supreme Court in which the Court held that property damage during a no-knock warrant is irrelevant as long as law enforcement has reasonable suspicion that knocking and announcing would be a dangerous move.
appeal from the Special Court of Appeals of Virginia judgment reversed, and cause remanded United States v. Erie Railroad Company: 280 U.S. 98 (1929) Brandeis 9–0 none none appeal from the United States District Court for the District of New Jersey (D.N.J.) judgment reversed Chesapeake and Ohio Railway Company v. Mihas: 280 U.S. 102 (1929 ...
The writ is usually issued to a state supreme court (including high courts of the District of Columbia, Puerto Rico, the U.S. Virgin Islands, Guam, the Northern Mariana Islands, and American Samoa), but is occasionally issued to a state's intermediate appellate court for cases where the state supreme court denied certiorari or review and ...
A petition for certiorari before judgment, in the Supreme Court of the United States, is a petition for a writ of certiorari in which the Supreme Court is asked to immediately review the decision of a United States District Court, without an appeal having been decided by a United States Court of Appeals, for the purpose of expediting the proceedings and obtaining a final decision.
The Supreme Court normally DIGs a case through a per curiam decision, [a] usually without giving reasons, [2] but rather issuing a one-line decision: "The writ of certiorari is dismissed as improvidently granted." However, justices sometimes file separate opinions, and the opinion of the Court may instead give reasons for the DIG.
The Supreme Court of Virginia has stated that '"This Court has repeatedly held that the effect of an appeal to circuit court is to "annul the judgment of the inferior tribunal as completely as if there had been no previous trial."' [14] The only exception to this is that if a defendant appeals a conviction for a crime having multiple levels of ...
The case was decided on February 16, 2001. The appeals court upheld the decision of the district court in a 2–1 opinion. In his dissent, Judge David Sentelle agreed with the plaintiffs that CTEA was indeed unconstitutional based on the "limited Times" requirement. Supreme Court precedent, he argued, held that one must be able to discern an ...