Skip to content

Us Supreme Court Court March 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.

Mar 07 2005

Shepard Vs. United States

Court: US Supreme Court

Decided on: Mar-07-2005

Shepard v. United States - 03-9168 (2005) SYLLABUS OCTOBER TERM, 2004 SHEPARD V. UNITED STATES SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES SHEPARD v. UNITED STATES certiorari to the united states court of appeals for the first circuit No. 039168.Argued November 8, 2004Decided March 7, 2005 After petitioner Shepard pleaded guilty to being a felon in possession of a firearm in violation of 18 U. S. C. 922(g)(1), the Government sought to increase his sentence from a 37-month maximum to the 15-year minimum that 924(e), popularly known as the Armed Career Criminal Act (ACCA), mandates for such felons who have three prior convictions for violent felonies or drug offenses. Shepards predicate felonies were Massachusetts burglary convictions entered upon guilty pleas. This Court has held that only generic burglarymeaning, among other things, that it was committed in a building or enclosed spaceis a violent crime under the ACCA, Taylor v. United States, 495 U. S. 575 , 599, and that a cou...


Mar 02 2005

Tenet Vs. Doe

Court: US Supreme Court

Decided on: Mar-02-2005

Tenet v. Doe - 03-1395 (2005) OCTOBER TERM, 2004 TENET V. DOE SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES TENET et al. v. DOE et ux. certiorari to the united states court of appeals for the ninth circuit No. 031395.Argued January 11, 2005Decided March 2, 2005 Respondent husband and wife filed suit against the United States and the Director of the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA), asserting estoppel and due process claims for the CIAs alleged failure to provide them with financial assistance it had promised in return for their espionage services during the Cold War. The District Court denied the Governments motions to dismiss and for summary judgment, finding that respondents claims were not barred by the rule of Totten v. United States, 92 U. S. 105 , prohibiting suits against the Government based on covert espionage agreements. Affirming in relevant part, the Ninth Circuit reasoned that Totten posed no bar to reviewing some of respondents claims and thus the case could pro...


Mar 01 2005

Cherokee Nation of OklA. Vs. Leavitt

Court: US Supreme Court

Decided on: Mar-01-2005

Cherokee Nation of Okla. v. Leavitt - 02-1472 (2005) SYLLABUS OCTOBER TERM, 2004 CHEROKEE NATION OF OKLA. V. LEAVITT SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES CHEROKEE NATION OF OKLAHOMA et al. v. LEAVITT, SECRETARY OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES, et al. certiorari to the united states court of appeals for the tenth circuit No. 021472.Argued November 9, 2004Decided March 1, 2005 The Indian Self-Determination and Education Assistance Act (Act) authorizes the Government and Indian tribes to enter into contracts in which tribes promise to supply federally funded services that a Government agency normally would provide, 25 U. S. C. 450(f); and requires the Government to pay, inter alia, a tribes contract support costs, which are reasonable costs that a federal agency would not have incurred, but which the tribe would incur in managing the program, 450j1(a)(2). Here, each Tribe agreed to supply health services normally provided by the Department of Health and Human Services Indian Healt...


Mar 01 2005

Roper Vs. Simmons

Court: US Supreme Court

Decided on: Mar-01-2005

Roper v. Simmons - 03-633 (2005) SYLLABUS OCTOBER TERM, 2004 ROPER V. SIMMONS SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES ROPER, SUPERINTENDENT, POTOSI CORRECTIONAL CENTER v. SIMMONS certiorari to the supreme court of missouri No. 03633.Argued October 13, 2004Decided March 1, 2005 At age 17, respondent Simmons planned and committed a capital murder. After he had turned 18, he was sentenced to death. His direct appeal and subsequent petitions for state and federal postconviction relief were rejected. This Court then held, in Atkins v. Virginia, 536 U. S. 304 , that the Eighth Amendment, applicable to the States through the Fourteenth Amendment, prohibits the execution of a mentally retarded person. Simmons filed a new petition for state postconviction relief, arguing that Atkins reasoning established that the Constitution prohibits the execution of a juvenile who was under 18 when he committed his crime. The Missouri Supreme Court agreed and set aside Simmons death sentence in...


  • Next ›

AI Briefs · Semantic Search · Save & annotate judgments

Start your 7-day free trial