When.com Web Search

Search results

  1. Results From The WOW.Com Content Network
  2. Berghuis v. Thompkins - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Berghuis_v._Thompkins

    Berghuis v. Thompkins, 560 U.S. 370 (2010), is a landmark decision by the Supreme Court of the United States in which the Court held that, unless and until a criminal suspect explicitly states that they are relying on their right to remain silent, their voluntary statements may be used in court and police may continue to question them.

  3. Griffin v. California - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Griffin_v._California

    Griffin v. California, 380 U.S. 609 (1965), was a United States Supreme Court case in which the Court ruled, by a 6–2 vote, that it is a violation of a defendant's Fifth Amendment rights for the prosecutor to comment to the jury on the defendant's declining to testify, or for the judge to instruct the jury that such silence is evidence of guilt.

  4. Melendez-Diaz v. Massachusetts - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Melendez-Diaz_v._Massachusetts

    Melendez-Diaz v. Massachusetts, 557 U.S. 305 (2009), [1] is a United States Supreme Court case in which the Court held that it was a violation of the Sixth Amendment right of confrontation for a prosecutor to submit a chemical drug test report without the testimony of the person who performed the test. [2]

  5. Consciousness of guilt - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Consciousness_of_guilt

    The Supreme Court has not explicitly decided whether a defendant's pre-arrest silence may be introduced as substantive evidence of guilt (i.e., may be used in the government's case-in-chief, even if the defendant chooses not to testify). A three-justice plurality of the Court, in Salinas v.

  6. The Supreme Court's Confused Ruling on the Trump Ballot Case

    www.aol.com/news/supreme-courts-confused-ruling...

    The Supreme Court's confused ruling on the Trump disqualification case raises more questions about partisanship.

  7. Confrontation Clause - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Confrontation_Clause

    In 2004, in Crawford v.Washington, the Supreme Court of the United States significantly redefined the application of the Sixth Amendment's right to confrontation. In Crawford, the Supreme Court changed the inquiry from whether the evidence offered had an "indicia of reliability" to whether the evidence is testimonial hearsay. [3]

  8. “Technically Wrong, Morally Right”: 30 Times Cops Have Done ...

    www.aol.com/most-corrupt-thing-ve-seen-060007040...

    Image credits: Marinerprocess #3. Maybe not the most corrupt, but one of the most slimy. The weekend watch commander and four officers were stealing money from people brought in intoxicated.

  9. US Justice Department finds violations in Oklahoma's ...

    www.aol.com/news/us-justice-department-finds...

    WASHINGTON (Reuters) -The state of Oklahoma is violating federal law by unnecessarily committing people with mental illness and drug abuse disorders to psychiatric hospitals, the U.S. Justice ...