Search results
Results From The WOW.Com Content Network
A deferred adjudication, also known in some jurisdictions as an adjournment in contemplation of dismissal (ACOD), probation before judgment (PBJ), or deferred entry of judgment (DEJ), is a form of plea deal available in various jurisdictions, where a defendant pleads "guilty" or "no contest" to criminal charges in exchange for meeting certain requirements laid out by the court within an ...
Tumey v. Ohio, 273 U.S. 510 (1927), is a US Supreme Court case, concerning the due process of judicial disqualification. [1] The court struck down an Ohio law that financially rewarded public officials for successfully prosecuting cases related to Prohibition.
In criminal procedure, an adjournment in contemplation of dismissal (ACD or ACOD) allows a court to defer the disposition of a defendant's case, with the potential that the defendant's charge will be dismissed if the defendant does not engage in additional criminal conduct or other acts prohibited by the court as a condition of the ACD.
A deferred sentence is a sentence that is suspended until after a defendant has completed a period of probation. If the defendant fulfills the stipulations surrounding probation, a judge may then throw out the sentence and guilty plea, clearing the incident from their record.
In a "deferred prosecution" deal with the U.S. Attorney's Office, FirstEnergy threw Randazzo under the bus by admitting it paid him the bribe. Several FirstEnergy executives were fired, but no one ...
Mapp v. Ohio, 367 U.S. 643 (1961), was a landmark U.S. Supreme Court decision in which the Court ruled that the exclusionary rule, which prevents a prosecutor from using evidence that was obtained by violating the Fourth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution, applies to states as well as the federal government.
Cleveland Board of Education v. Loudermill, 470 U.S. 532 (1985), was a United States Supreme Court case in which the Court held that: . certain public-sector employees can have a property interest in their employment, per Constitutional Due Process.
City of Norwood v. Horney, 110 Ohio St.3d 353 (2006), was a case brought before the Ohio Supreme Court in 2006. The case came upon the heels of Kelo v.City of New London, in which the United States Supreme Court ruled that commercial development justified the use of eminent domain.