Us Supreme Court Court July 1983 Judgments
Browse smarter
Open an 18-section brief on any judgment
Structured AI Brief in seconds on any result - plus Semantic Search when you need meaning, not just keywords.
- AI Brief & Ask
- Semantic AI Search
- Devil's Bench
Credentials emailed - log in to pick up where you left off.
Ruckelshaus Vs. Monsanto Co.
Court: US Supreme Court
Decided on: Jul-27-1983
Ruckelshaus v. Monsanto Co. - 463 U.S. 1315 (1983) U.S. Supreme Court Ruckelshaus v. Monsanto Co., 463 U.S. 1315 (1983) Ruckelshaus v. Monsanto Co. No. A-1066 Decided July 27, 1983 463 U.S. 1315 ON APPLICATION FOR STAY Syllabus An application to stay, pending appeal, an injunction of the District Court -- which held unconstitutional, and enjoined enforcement of, provisions of the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act that authorize manufacturers seeking registration of pesticides with the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to use test data submitted by an earlier registration applicant, and that permit disclosure to the public of health and safety data -- is denied. Applicant, the Administrator of the EPA, failed to show that irreparable harm to the EPA will result if the District Court's injunction remains in effect pending appeal. However, the granting of a stay might well cause irreparable harm to respondent, a manufacturer of registered pesticides who had...
Ncaa Vs. Board of Regents
Court: US Supreme Court
Decided on: Jul-21-1983
NCAA v. Board of Regents - 463 U.S. 1311 (1983) U.S. Supreme Court NCAA v. Board of Regents, 463 U.S. 1311 (1983) National Collegiate Athletic Association v. Board of Regents of University of Oklahoma No. A-24. Decided July 21, 1983 463 U.S. 1311 ON APPLICATION FOR STAY Syllabus An application by the National Collegiate Athletic Association, whose membership includes many colleges, universities, and athletic conferences, to stay the judgments of the Court of Appeals and the District Court is granted, pending the timely filing and disposition of a petition for a writ of certiorari. The courts below, in an action brought by respondents against applicant, held that the antitrust laws were violated by applicant's plan involving contracts with certain television networks for the broadcasting of football games of applicant's members, and an injunction has been issued forbidding further implementation of the contracts. A stay is proper since it is likely that at least four Justices...
Julian Vs. United States
Court: US Supreme Court
Decided on: Jul-13-1983
Julian v. United States - 463 U.S. 1308 (1983) U.S. Supreme Court Julian v. United States, 463 U.S. 1308 (1983) Julian v. United States No. A-1071 Decided July 13, 1983 463 U.S. 1308 ON APPLICATION FOR BAIL Syllabus An application for bail pending disposition of applicant's petition for certiorari to review the Court of Appeals' judgment -- which affirmed his conviction and sentences for attempted importation of narcotics, making false statements to a Government official, in violation of 18 U.S.C. 1001, and failing to file a report in connection with the transportation of more than $5,000 outside the United States, in violation of 31 U.S.C. 1101 -- is denied. None of the contentions raised by applicant, including issues relating to statutory construction and double jeopardy principles, is likely to command the vote of four Justices to grant certiorari. JUSTICE REHNQUIST, Circuit Justice. Applicant has filed a motion for bail pending disposition of his petition for writ of...
Capital Cities Media, Inc. Vs. Toole
Court: US Supreme Court
Decided on: Jul-13-1983
Capital Cities Media, Inc. v. Toole - 463 U.S. 1303 (1983) U.S. Supreme Court Capital Cities Media, Inc. v. Toole, 463 U.S. 1303 (1983) Capital Cities Media, Inc. v. Toole No. A-1070 Decided July 13, 1983 463 U.S. 1303 ON APPLICATION FOR STAY Syllabus An application to stay respondent Pennsylvania trial court judge's order is granted insofar as it prohibits publication of the names or addresses of jurors who served in a homicide trial. The order, which was entered after the jurors had been selected in open voir dire proceedings at which their names were not kept confidential, is not restricted to the time during which the trial was conducted, but on its face permanently prohibits publishing the jurors' names or addresses. The jury ultimately returned a guilty verdict and was discharged. If the Pennsylvania Supreme Court, which denied an application for summary relief, were to sustain the order on its merits, four Justices of this Court would probably vote to grant review, a...
Barefoot Vs. Estelle
Court: US Supreme Court
Decided on: Jul-06-1983
Barefoot v. Estelle - 463 U.S. 880 (1983) U.S. Supreme Court Barefoot v. Estelle, 463 U.S. 880 (1983) Barefoot v. Estelle No. 82-6080 Argued April 26, 1983 Decided July 6, 1983 463 U.S. 880 CERTIORARI TO THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT Syllabus Petitioner was convicted of capital murder in a Texas state court after a jury trial. A separate sentencing hearing was then held before the same jury to determine whether the death penalty should be imposed. One of the questions submitted to the jury, as required by a Texas statute, was whether there was a probability that the petitioner would commit further criminal acts of violence and would constitute a continuing threat to society. In addition to introducing other evidence, the State called two psychiatrists, who, in response to hypothetical questions, testified that there was such a probability. The jury answered the question, as well as another question as to whether the killing had been deliberate, in...
illinois Vs. Batchelder
Court: US Supreme Court
Decided on: Jul-06-1983
Illinois v. Batchelder - 463 U.S. 1112 (1983) U.S. Supreme Court Illinois v. Batchelder, 463 U.S. 1112 (1983) Illinois v. Batchelder No. 82-947 Decided July 6, 1983 463 U.S. 1112 ON PETITION FOR WRIT OF CERTIORARI TO THE APPELLATE COURT OF ILLINOIS, THIRD DISTRICT Syllabus Under Illinois' implied consent statute, if a driver, arrested for driving while intoxicated, refuses to take a breath analysis test, the arresting officer must file with the clerk of the appropriate circuit court an affidavit that includes the statement that the officer had "reasonable cause to believe the person was driving the motor vehicle . . . while under the influence of intoxicating liquor." The clerk must then notify the arrestee that his license will be suspended unless he requests a hearing within a specified time. Respondent refused to take a breath analysis test after he was arrested for driving under the influence of intoxicating liquor, and the arresting officer filed an affidavit that inclu...
Williams Vs. Missouri
Court: US Supreme Court
Decided on: Jul-06-1983
Williams v. Missouri - 463 U.S. 1301 (1983) U.S. Supreme Court Williams v. Missouri, 463 U.S. 1301 (1983) Williams v. Missouri No. A-1077 Decided July 6, 1983 463 U.S. 1301 ON APPLICATION FOR STAY Syllabus An application for a stay of execution pending timely filing and disposition of a petition for certiorari is granted, where the execution is set for a date before expiration of the period for applicant's filing a petition for certiorari to review the Missouri Supreme Court's affirmance of his conviction and death sentence. JUSTICE BLACKMUN, Circuit Justice. On May 31, 1983, the Supreme Court of Missouri affirmed applicant Williams' conviction and death sentence. 652 S.W.2d 102. It noted applicant's execution was set for July 15. On June 30, the Missouri Supreme Court denied applicant's timely motion for rehearing, and his motion requesting that court to stay issuance of its mandate pending final disposition of a petition for certiorari in this Court. Under the Rules of th...
Arizona Governing Comm. Vs. Norris
Court: US Supreme Court
Decided on: Jul-06-1983
Arizona Governing Comm. v. Norris - 463 U.S. 1073 (1983) U.S. Supreme Court Arizona Governing Comm. v. Norris, 463 U.S. 1073 (1983) Arizona Governing Committee for Tax Deferred Annuity and Deferred Compensation Plans v. Norris No. 82-52 Argued March 28, 1983 Decided July 6, 1983 463 U.S. 1073 CERTIORARI TO THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT Syllabus Respondent, a female employee of an Arizona state agency, instituted a class action in Federal District Court, alleging that the State's deferred compensation plan for its employees discriminated on the basis of sex in violation of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. Under the plan, employees have the option of receiving retirement benefits from one of several companies selected by the State, all of which pay lower monthly retirement benefits to a woman than to a man who has made the same contributions. The District Court granted summary judgment for the plaintiff class and ordered that retired fema...
California Vs. Ramos
Court: US Supreme Court
Decided on: Jul-06-1983
California v. Ramos - 463 U.S. 992 (1983) U.S. Supreme Court California v. Ramos, 463 U.S. 992 (1983) California v. Ramos No. 81-1893 Argued February 22, 1983 Decided July 6, 1983 463 U.S. 992 CERTIORARI TO THE SUPREME COURT OF CALIFORNIA Syllabus At the guilt phase of respondent's California state court trial, the jury returned a verdict of guilt on a count of first-degree murder, which is punishable under California law by death or life imprisonment without the possibility of parole where an alleged "special circumstance" (here the commission of murder during a robbery) is found true by the jury at the guilt phase. In addition to requiring jury instructions at the separate penalty phase on aggravating and mitigating circumstances, California law requires that the trial judge inform the jury that a sentence of life imprisonment without the possibility of parole may be commuted by the Governor to a sentence that includes the possibility of parole (the so-called Briggs Instru...
California Vs. Beheler
Court: US Supreme Court
Decided on: Jul-06-1983
California v. Beheler - 463 U.S. 1121 (1983) U.S. Supreme Court California v. Beheler, 463 U.S. 1121 (1983) California v. Beheler No. 82-1666 Decided July 6, 1983 463 U.S. 1121 ON PETITION FOR WRIT OF CERTIORARI TO THE COURT OF APPEAL OF CALIFORNIA, FIFTH APPELLATE DISTRICT Syllabus After respondent called the police to report a homicide in which he was involved, he voluntarily accompanied them to the station house, having been told that he was not under arrest. At the station house, the police did not advise respondent of his rights under Miranda v. Arizona, 384 U. S. 436 , and after an interview that lasted less than 30 minutes, he was allowed to leave. He was arrested five days later and, after receiving Miranda warnings, gave a second confession during which he admitted that his earlier interview had been given voluntarily. Subsequently, respondent was convicted in a California state court for aiding and abetting first-degree murder, the court having admitted into e...