Search results
Results From The WOW.Com Content Network
See Escobar v. Texas, 143 S. Ct. 557 (2023) (mem.); and (4) whether the Oklahoma Court of Criminal Appeals' holding that the Oklahoma Post-Conviction Procedure Act precluded post-conviction relief is an adequate and independent state-law ground for the judgment. January 22, 2024: October 9, 2024 Gutierrez v. Saenz: 23-7809
In August 1999, the Alaska Supreme Court used the ruling in Livermore v. Waite in the case Bess v. Ulmer noting "it is helpful to look to the law of California, a state which has considered the issue carefully over a period of nearly one hundred years. A line of California Supreme Court cases, beginning with Livermore v.
The Supreme Court also noted that the action by California could jeopardize foreign relations for the US government by running afoul of its treaty obligations. [ 2 ] [ 3 ] [ 10 ] The Supreme Court noted that although states could make reasonable and necessary regulations concerning paupers and convicted criminals, the statute went far beyond ...
The United States District Court for the Northern District of California canceled the railroad's land patents based upon the actual use and occupation of the Indians since 1855. [66] The Ninth Circuit agreed with the District Court, but cancelled the entirety of the patents at issue. [67] The Supreme Court considered six arguments by the railroad.
California, 549 U.S. 270 (2007), is a decision by the Supreme Court of the United States in which the Court held, 6–3, that the sentencing standard set forward in Apprendi v. New Jersey (2000) applies to California 's determinate sentencing law.
Sheetz v. County of El Dorado (Docket No. 22-1074) is a United States Supreme Court case regarding permit exactions under the Takings Clause.The Supreme Court held, in a unanimous opinion by Justice Amy Coney Barrett, that fees for land-use permits must be closely related and roughly proportional to the effects of the land use – the test established by Nollan v.
Bristol-Myers Squibb Co. v. Superior Court of California, San Francisco County, 582 U.S. ___ (2017), was a United States Supreme Court case in which the Court held that California courts lacked personal jurisdiction over the defendant on claims brought by plaintiffs who are not California residents and did not suffer their alleged injury in California. [1]
Hill v. California, 401 U.S. 797 (1971) was a U.S. Supreme Court decision that ruled against the retroactive application of Chimel v. California.The Court also ruled that evidence from mistaken identity arrests can be admissible as long as other factors support probable cause.