Search results
Results From The WOW.Com Content Network
A dissenting opinion does not create binding precedent nor does it become a part of case law, though they can sometimes be cited as a form of persuasive authority in subsequent cases when arguing that the court's holding should be limited or overturned. In some cases, a previous dissent is used to spur a change in the law, and a later case may ...
Kingsley v. Hendrickson, 576 U.S. 389 (2015), is a United States Supreme Court case in which the Court held in a 5–4 decision that a pretrial detainee must prove only that force used by police is excessive according to an objective standard, not that a police officer was subjectively aware that the force used was unreasonable.
In legal research, a primary authority is a term referring to statements of law that are binding upon the courts, government, and individuals. Primary authority is usually in the form of a document that establishes the law, and if no document exists, is a legal opinion of a court. The search for applicable primary authority is the most ...
Precedent is a judicial decision that serves as an authority for courts when deciding subsequent identical or similar cases. [1] [2] [3] Fundamental to common law legal systems, precedent operates under the principle of stare decisis ("to stand by things decided"), where past judicial decisions serve as case law to guide future rulings, thus promoting consistency and predictability.
Main page; Contents; Current events; Random article; About Wikipedia; Contact us; Help; Learn to edit; Community portal; Recent changes; Upload file
The Illinois Compiled Statutes (ILCS) form the general statutory law. The case law of the Illinois Supreme Court and state appellate courts is currently published online under a public domain reporting system. Interpretations of law and conflicts among the various levels of law are referred to the Illinois courts in suits for application of ...
Aguilar v. Texas, 378 U.S. 108 (1964), was a decision by the United States Supreme Court, which held that "[a]lthough an affidavit supporting a search warrant may be based on hearsay information and need not reflect the direct personal observations of the affiant, the magistrate must be informed of some of the underlying circumstances relied on by the person providing the information and some ...
Outrageous Government Conduct is a criminal defense that presupposes the defendant's predisposition to commit the crime but seeks dismissal of the indictment on the ground that the conduct of law enforcement agents was "so outrageous that due process principles would absolutely bar the government from invoking judicial process to obtain a conviction."