Court : US Supreme Court
United States v. Booker - 04-104 (2005) SYLLABUS OCTOBER TERM, 2004 UNITED STATES V. BOOKER SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES UNITED STATES v. BOOKER certiorari to the united states court of appeals for the seventh circuit No. 04104.Argued October 4, 2004Decided January 12, 2005 Under the Federal Sentencing Guidelines, the sentence authorized by the jury verdict in respondent Bookers drug case was 210-to-262 months in prison. At the sentencing hearing, the judge found additional facts by a preponderance of the evidence. Because these findings mandated a sentence between 360 months and life, the judge gave Booker a 30-year sentence instead of the 21-year, 10-month, sentence he could have imposed based on the facts proved to the jury beyond a reasonable doubt. The Seventh Circuit held that this application of the Guidelines conflicted with the Apprendi v. New Jersey, 530 U. S. 466 , 490, holding that [o]ther than the fact of a prior conviction, any fact that increases th...
Tag this Judgment!Court : US Supreme Court
Baze v. Rees - 07-5439 (2008) SYLLABUS OCTOBER TERM, 2007 BAZE V. REES SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES BAZE etal. v . REES, COMMISSIONER, KENTUCKY DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS, etal. certiorari to the supreme court of kentucky No. 075439.Argued January 7, 2008Decided April 16, 2008 Lethal injection is used for capital punishment by the Federal Government and 36 States, at least 30 of which (including Kentucky) use the same combination of three drugs:The first, sodium thiopental, induces unconsciousness when given in the specified amounts and thereby ensures that the prisoner does not experience any pain associated with the paralysis and cardiac arrest caused by the second and third drugs, pancuronium bromide and potassium chloride. Among other things, Kentuckys lethal injection protocol reserves to qualified personnel having at least one years professional experience the responsibility for inserting the intravenous (IV) catheters into the prisoner, leaving it to others to mi...
Tag this Judgment!Court : US Supreme Court
Exxon Shipping Co. v. Baker - 07-219 (2008) SYLLABUS OCTOBER TERM, 2007 EXXON SHIPPING CO. V. BAKER SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES EXXON SHIPPING CO. etal. v . BAKER etal. certiorari to the united states court of appeals for the ninth circuit No. 07219.Argued February 27, 2008Decided June 25, 2008 In 1989, petitioners (collectively, Exxon) supertanker grounded on a reef off Alaska, spilling millions of gallons of crude oil into Prince William Sound. The accident occurred after the tankers captain, Joseph Hazelwoodwho had a history of alcohol abuse and whose blood still had a high alcohol level 11 hours after the spillinexplicably exited the bridge, leaving a tricky course correction to unlicensed subordinates. Exxon spent some $2.1 billion in cleanup efforts, pleaded guilty to criminal violations occasioning fines, settled a civil action by the United States and Alaska for at least $900 million, and paid another $303 million in voluntary payments to private parties. Othe...
Tag this Judgment!Court : US Supreme Court
District of Columbia v. Heller - 07-290 (2008) SYLLABUS OCTOBER TERM, 2007 DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA V. HELLER SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA etal. v . HELLER certiorari to the united states court of appeals for the district of columbia circuit No. 07290.Argued March 18, 2008Decided June 26, 2008 District of Columbia law bans handgun possession by making it a crime to carry an unregistered firearm and prohibiting the registration of handguns; provides separately that no person may carry an unlicensed handgun, but authorizes the police chief to issue 1-year licenses; and requires residents to keep lawfully owned firearms unloaded and dissembled or bound by a trigger lock or similar device. Respondent Heller, a D.C. special policeman, applied to register a handgun he wished to keep at home, but the District refused. He filed this suit seeking, on Second Amendment grounds, to enjoin the city from enforcing the bar on handgun registration, the licensing requi...
Tag this Judgment!Court : US Supreme Court
Haywood v. Drown - 07-10374 (2009) SYLLABUS OCTOBER TERM, 2008 HAYWOOD V. DROWN SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES HAYWOOD v . DROWN etal. certiorari to the court of appeals of new york No. 0710374.Argued December 3, 2008Decided May 26, 2009 Believing that damages suits filed by prisoners against state correction officers were largely frivolous and vexatious, New York passed Correction Law 24, which divested state courts of general jurisdiction of their jurisdiction over such suits, including those filed under 42 U. S.C. 1983, and replaced those claims with the States preferred alternative. Thereunder, a prisoner will have his claim against a correction officer dismissed for want of jurisdiction and will be left to pursue a damages claim against the State in the Court of Claims, a court of limited jurisdiction in which the prisoner will not be entitled to attorneys fees, punitive damages, or injunctive relief. Petitioner filed two 1983 damages actions against correction empl...
Tag this Judgment!Court : US Supreme Court
Citizens United v. Federal Election Comm'n - 08-205 (2010) SYLLABUS OCTOBER TERM, 2009 CITIZENS UNITED V. FEDERAL ELECTION COMM'N SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES CITIZENS UNITED v . FEDERAL ELECTIONCOMMISSION appeal from the united states district court for the district of columbia No. 08205.Argued March 24, 2009Reargued September 9, 2009Decided January 21, 2010 As amended by 203 of the Bipartisan Campaign Reform Act of 2002 (BCRA), federal law prohibits corporations and unions from using their general treasury funds to make independent expenditures for speech that is an electioneering communication or for speech that expressly advocates the election or defeat of a candidate. 2 U. S.C. 441b. An electioneering communication is any broadcast, cable, or satellite communication that refers to a clearly identified candidate for Federal office and is made within 30 days of a primary election, 434(f)(3)(A), and that is publicly distributed, 11 CFR 100.29(a)(2), which in the case...
Tag this Judgment!Court : US Supreme Court
McDonald v. Chicago - 08-1521 (2010) SYLLABUS OCTOBER TERM, 2009 MCDONALD V. CHICAGO SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES McDONALD etal. v . CITY OF CHICAGO, ILLINOIS, etal. certiorari to the united states court of appeals for the seventh circuit No. 081521.Argued March 2, 2010Decided June 28, 2010 Two years ago, in District of Columbia v. Heller , 554 U. S. ___, this Court held that the Second Amendment protects the right to keep and bear arms for the purpose of self-defense and struck down a District of Columbia law that banned the possession of handguns in the home. Chicago (hereinafter City) and the village of Oak Park, a Chicago suburb, have laws effectively banning handgun possession by almost all private citizens. After Heller , petitioners filed this federal suit against the City, which was consolidated with two related actions, alleging that the Citys handgun ban has left them vulnerable to criminals. They sought a declaration that the ban and several related Ci...
Tag this Judgment!Court : US Supreme Court
Nat'l Fed'n of Indep. Bus. v. Sebelius NOTE:Where it is feasible, a syllabus (headnote) will be released, as is being done in connection with this case, at the time the opinion is issued. The syllabus constitutes no part of the opinion of the Court but has been prepared by the Reporter of Decisions for the convenience of the reader. See United States v. Detroit Timber & Lumber Co., 200 U.S. 321. SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES Syllabus NATIONAL FEDERATION OF INDEPENDENT BUSINESS etal. v. SEBELIUS, SECRETARY OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES, etal. certiorari to the united states court of appeals for the eleventh circuit No. 11393.Argued March 26, 27, 28, 2012Decided June 28, 2012[ 1 ] In 2010, Congress enacted the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act in order to increase the number of Americans covered by health insurance and decrease the cost of health care. One key provision is the individual mandate, which requires most Americans to maintain minimum essential healt...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
1 REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL ORIGINAL JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) No.536 OF2011Public Interest Foundation & Ors. Petitioner(s) Union of India & Anr. Versus WITH Respondent(s) CRIMINAL APPEAL NOS. 1714-1715 OF2007WRIT PETITION (CRIMINAL) No.208 OF2011AND WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) No.800 OF2015JUDGMENT Dipak Misra, CJI In Yogendra Kumar Jaiswal and others v. State of Bihar and others1, the Court opined:- 1 (2016) 3 SCC1832 2. 'noun' when assumes all "Corruption, a the characteristics of a Verb', becomes self-infective and also develops resistance to antibiotics. In such a situation the disguised protagonist never puts a Hamletian question-"to be or not to be"-but marches ahead with perverted proclivity-sans concern, sans care for collective irrefragably without conscience. In a way, corruption becomes a national economic terror." The constitutional functionaries, who have taken the pledge to interest, and uphold the constitutional principles, are charged with the r...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL ORIGINAL JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) No.494 OF2012JUSTICE K.S. PUTTASWAMY (RETD.) AND ANOTHER .....PETITIONER(S) VERSUS UNION OF INDIA AND OTHERS .....RESPONDENT(S) WITH TRANSFERRED CASE (CIVIL) No.151 OF2013TRANSFERRED CASE (CIVIL) No.152 OF2013WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) No.833 OF2013WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) No.829 OF2013TRANSFERRED PETITION (CIVIL) No.1797 OF2013WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) No.932 OF2013TRANSFERRED PETITION (CIVIL) No.1796 OF2013CONTEMPT PETITION (CIVIL) No.144 OF2014WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) No.494 OF2012IN TRANSFERRED PETITION (CIVIL) No.313 OF2014TRANSFERRED PETITION (CIVIL) No.312 OF2014SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (CRIMINAL) No.2524 OF2014WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) No.37 OF2015Writ Petition (Civil) No.494 of 2012 & c onnected matters Page 1 of 567 WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) No.220 OF2015CONTEMPT PETITION (CIVIL) No.674 OF2015WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) No.829 OF2013TRANSFERRED PETITION (CIVIL) No.921 OF2015CONTEMPT PETITION (CIVIL) No.470 OF2015WRIT...
Tag this Judgment!