Us Supreme Court Court March 2008 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.
Medellín Vs. Texas
Court: US Supreme Court
Decided on: Mar-25-2008
Medelln v. Texas - 06-984 (2008) SYLLABUS OCTOBER TERM, 2007 MEDELLIN V. TEXAS SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES MEDELLIN v . TEXAS certiorari to the court of criminal appeals of texas No. 06984.Argued October 10, 2007Decided March 25, 2008 In the Case Concerning Avena and Other Mexican Nationals ( Mex. v. U. S. ), 2004 I. C. J. 12 ( Avena ), the International Court of Justice (ICJ) held that the United States had violated Article 36(1)(b) of the Vienna Convention on Consular Relations (Vienna Convention or Convention) by failing to inform 51 named Mexican nationals, including petitioner Medelln, of their Vienna Convention rights. The ICJ found that those named individuals were entitled to review and reconsideration of their U. S. state-court convictions and sentences regardless of their failure to comply with generally applicable state rules governing challenges to criminal convictions. In Sanchez-Llamas v. Oregon , 548 U. S. 331 issued after Avena but involv...
Medellín Vs. Texas
Court: US Supreme Court
Decided on: Mar-25-2008
Medelln v. Texas - 06-984 (2008) SYLLABUS OCTOBER TERM, 2007 MEDELLIN V. TEXAS SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES MEDELLIN v . TEXAS certiorari to the court of criminal appeals of texas No. 06984.Argued October 10, 2007Decided March 25, 2008 In the Case Concerning Avena and Other Mexican Nationals ( Mex. v. U. S. ), 2004 I. C. J. 12 ( Avena ), the International Court of Justice (ICJ) held that the United States had violated Article 36(1)(b) of the Vienna Convention on Consular Relations (Vienna Convention or Convention) by failing to inform 51 named Mexican nationals, including petitioner Medelln, of their Vienna Convention rights. The ICJ found that those named individuals were entitled to review and reconsideration of their U. S. state-court convictions and sentences regardless of their failure to comply with generally applicable state rules governing challenges to criminal convictions. In Sanchez-Llamas v. Oregon , 548 U. S. 331issued after Avena but involvi...
Hall Street Associates, L. L. C. Vs. Mattel, Inc.
Court: US Supreme Court
Decided on: Mar-25-2008
Hall Street Associates, L. L. C. v. Mattel, Inc. - 06-989 (2008) SYLLABUS OCTOBER TERM, 2007 HALL STREET ASSOCIATES, L.L.C. V. MATTEL, INC. SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES HALL STREET ASSOCIATES, L. L. C. v . MATTEL, INC. certiorari to the united states court of appeals for the ninth circuit No. 06989.Argued November 7, 2007Decided March 25, 2008 The Federal Arbitration Act (FAA), 9 U. S. C. 911, provides expedited judicial review to confirm, vacate, or modify arbitration awards. Under 9, a court must confirm an award unless it is vacated, modified, or corrected as prescribed in 10 and 11. Section 10 lists grounds for vacating an award, including where the award was procured by corruption, fraud, or undue means, and where the arbitrators were guilty of misconduct, or exceeded their powers. Under 11, the grounds for modifying or correcting an award include evident material miscalculation, evident material mistake, and imperfect[ions] in [a] matter of form not affecting the...
Snyder Vs. Louisiana
Court: US Supreme Court
Decided on: Mar-19-2008
Snyder v. Louisiana - 06-10119 (2008) SYLLABUS OCTOBER TERM, 2007 SNYDER V. LOUISIANA SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES SNYDER v . LOUISIANA certiorari to the supreme court of louisiana No. 0610119.Argued December 4, 2007Decided March 19, 2008 During voir dire in petitioners capital murder case, the prosecutor used peremptory strikes to eliminate black prospective jurors who had survived challenges for cause. The jury convicted petitioner and sentenced him to death. Both on direct appeal and on remand in light of Miller-El v. Dretke , 545 U. S. 231 , the Louisiana Supreme Court rejected petitioners claim that the prosecutions peremptory strikes of certain prospective jurors, including Mr. Brooks, were based on race, in violation of Batson v. Kentucky , 476 U. S. 79 . Held: The trial judge committed clear error in rejecting the Batson objection to the strike of Mr. Brooks. Pp. 313. (a) Under Batson s three-step process for adjudicating claims such as p...
Washington State Grange Vs. Washington State Republican Party
Court: US Supreme Court
Decided on: Mar-18-2008
Washington State Grange v. Washington State Republican Party - 06-713 (2008) SYLLABUS OCTOBER TERM, 2007 WASHINGTON STATE GRANGE V. WASHINGTON STATEREPUBLICAN PARTY SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES WASHINGTON STATE GRANGE v . WASHINGTON STATE REPUBLICAN PARTY et al. certiorari to the united states court of appeals for the ninth circuit No. 06713.Argued October 1, 2007Decided March 18, 2008 After the Ninth Circuit invalidated Washingtons blanket primary system on the ground that it was nearly identical to the California system struck down in California Democratic Party v. Jones , 530 U. S. 567 , state voters passed an initiative (I872), providing that candidates must be identified on the primary ballot by their self-designated party preference; that voters may vote for any candidate; and that the two top votegetters for each office, regardless of party preference, advance to the general election. Respondent political parties claim that the new law, on its face, violat...
Warner-lambert Co. Vs. Kent
Court: US Supreme Court
Decided on: Mar-03-2008
Warner-Lambert Co. v. Kent - 06-1498 (2008) Warner-Lambert Co. v. Kent - 06-1498 (2008) 552 U. S. ____ (2008) 552 U. S. ____ (2008) 552 U. S. ____ (2008) SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES NO. 06-1498 WARNER-LAMBERT CO., LLC, et al., PETITIONERS v. KIMBERLY KENT et al. on writ of certiorari to the united states court ofappeals for the second circuit [March 3, 2008] Per Curiam. The judgment is affirmed by an equally divided Court. The Chief Justice took no part in the consideration or decision of this case. ...
Boulware Vs. United States
Court: US Supreme Court
Decided on: Mar-03-2008
Boulware v. United States - 06-1509 (2008) SYLLABUS OCTOBER TERM, 2007 BOULWARE V. UNITED STATES SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES BOULWARE v . UNITED STATES certiorari to the united states court of appeals for the ninth circuit No. 061509.Argued January 8, 2008Decided March 3, 2008 One element of tax evasion under 26 U. S. C. 7201 is the existence of a tax deficiency. Sansone v. United States , 380 U. S. 343 , 351. Petitioner Boulware was charged with criminal tax evasion and filing a false income tax return for diverting funds from a closely held corporation, HIE, of which he was the president, founder, and controlling shareholder. To support his argument that the Government could not establish the tax deficiency required to convict him, Boulware sought to introduce evidence that HIE had no earnings and profits in the relevant taxable years, so he in effect received distributions of property that were returns of capital, up to his basis in his stock, which are not t...
- ‹ Prev
- Next ›