Us Supreme Court Court January 2005 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.
Bell Vs. Cone
Court: US Supreme Court
Decided on: Jan-24-2005
Bell v. Cone - 04-394 (2005) Bell v. Cone - 04-394 (2005) PER CURIAM BELL V. CONE 543 U. S. ____ (2005) SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES RICKY BELL, WARDEN v. GARY BRADFORD CONE on petition for writ of certiorari to the united states court of appeals for the sixth circuit No. 04394.Decided January 24, 2005 Per Curiam. The United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit granted a writ of habeas corpus to respondent Gary Bradford Cone after concluding that the especially heinous, atrocious, or cruel aggravating circumstance found by the jury at the sentencing phase of his trial was unconstitutionally vague, and that the Tennessee Supreme Court failed to cure any constitutional deficiencies on appeal. 359 F. 3d 785, 799 (2004). Because this result fails to accord to the state court the deference required by 28 U. S. C. 2254(d), we grant the petition for certiorari and respondents motion to proceed in forma pauperis and reverse. I Respondent killed Shipley ...
Commissioner Vs. Banks
Court: US Supreme Court
Decided on: Jan-24-2005
Commissioner v. Banks - 03-892 (2005) SYLLABUS OCTOBER TERM, 2004 COMMISSIONER V. BANKS SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE v. BANKS certiorari to the united states court of appeals for the sixth circuit No. 03892.Argued November 1, 2004Decided January 24, 2005* Respondent Banks settled his federal employment discrimination suit against a California state agency and respondent Banaitis settled his Oregon state case against his former employer, but neither included fees paid to their attorneys under contingent-fee agreements as gross income on their federal income tax returns. In each case petitioner Commissioner of Internal Revenue issued a notice of deficiency, which the Tax Court upheld. In Banks case, the Sixth Circuit reversed in part, finding that the amount Banks paid to his attorney was not includable as gross income. In Banaitis case, the Ninth Circuit found that because Oregon law grants attorneys a superior lien in the contingent-fee...
illinois Vs. Caballes
Court: US Supreme Court
Decided on: Jan-24-2005
Illinois v. Caballes - 03-923 (2005) SYLLABUS OCTOBER TERM, 2004 SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES ILLINOIS v. CABALLES certiorari to the supreme court of illinois No. 03923.Argued November 10, 2004Decided January 24, 2005 After an Illinois state trooper stopped respondent for speeding and radioed in, a second trooper, overhearing the transmission, drove to the scene with his narcotics-detection dog and walked the dog around respondents car while the first trooper wrote respondent a warning ticket. When the dog alerted at respondents trunk, the officers searched the trunk, found marijuana, and arrested respondent. At respondents drug trial, the court denied his motion to suppress the seized evidence, holding, inter alia , that the dogs alerting provided sufficient probable cause to conduct the search. Respondent was convicted, but the Illinois Supreme Court reversed, finding that because there were no specific and articulable facts to suggest drug activity, use of the dog ...
Jama Vs. Immigration and Customs Enforcement
Court: US Supreme Court
Decided on: Jan-12-2005
Jama v. Immigration and Customs Enforcement - 03-674 (2005) SYLLABUS OCTOBER TERM, 2004 JAMA V. IMMIGRATION AND CUSTOMS ENFORCEMENT SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES JAMA v. IMMIGRATION AND CUSTOMS ENFORCEMENT certiorari to the united states court of appeals for the eighth circuit No. 03674.Argued October 12, 2004Decided January 12, 2005 Title 8 U. S. C. 1231(b)(2) prescribes the procedure for selecting the country to which an alien ineligible to remain in the United States will be removed. Petitioner had his refugee status in the United States terminated for a criminal conviction. When he declined to designate a country to which he preferred to be removed, the Immigration Judge ordered him removed to Somalia, his country of birth, pursuant to 1231(b)(2)(E)(iv). Petitioner filed a habeas petition to challenge the designation, claiming that Somalia had no functioning government and thus could not consent in advance to his removal, and that the Government was barred from remo...
United States Vs. Booker
Court: US Supreme Court
Decided on: Jan-12-2005
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...
Clark Vs. Martinez
Court: US Supreme Court
Decided on: Jan-12-2005
Clark v. Martinez - 03-878 (2005) SYLLABUS OCTOBER TERM, 2004 CLARK V. MARTINEZ SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES CLARK, FIELD OFFICE DIRECTOR, SEATTLE, IMMIGRATION AND CUSTOMS ENFORCEMENT, et al. v. MARTINEZ certiorari to the united states court of appeals for the ninth circuit No. 03878.Argued October 13, 2004Decided January 12, 2005 If an alien is found inadmissible and ordered removed, the Secretary of Homeland Security (Secretary) ordinarily must remove the alien from the country within 90 days. 8 U. S. C. 1231(a)(1)(A). Here, Martinez, respondent in No. 03878, and Benitez, petitioner in No. 037434, Cuban nationals who are both inadmissible under 1182, were ordered removed, but were detained beyond the 90-day removal period. Each filed a habeas corpus petition challenging his continued detention. In Martinezs case, the District Court found that removal was not reasonably foreseeable and ordered that Martinez be released under appropriate conditions. The Ninth Circuit a...
Whitfield Vs. United States
Court: US Supreme Court
Decided on: Jan-11-2005
Whitfield v. United States - 03-1293 (2005) SYLLABUS OCTOBER TERM, 2004 WHITFIELD V. UNITED STATES SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES WHITFIELD v. UNITED STATES certiorari to the united states court of appeals for the eleventh circuit No. 031293.Argued November 30, 2004Decided January 11, 2005 Petitioners were convicted of conspiracy to launder money in violation of 18 U. S. C. 1956(h) after the District Court denied their request to instruct the jury that the Government was required to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that at least one of the co-conspirators had committed an overt act in furtherance of the conspiracy. The Court of Appeals affirmed the convictions, holding, in relevant part, that the jury instructions were proper because 1956(h) does not require proof of an overt act. Held: Conviction for conspiracy to commit money laundering, in violation of 1956(h), does not require proof of an overt act in furtherance of the conspiracy. Pp. 310. (a) Section 1956(h) ...
- ‹ Prev
- Next ›