Us Supreme Court Court April 2014 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.
Paroline Vs. United States
Court: US Supreme Court
Decided on: Apr-23-2014
Paroline v. United States 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 PAROLINE v. UNITED STATES et al. certiorari to the united states court of appeals for the fifth circuit No. 128561.Argued January 22, 2014Decided April 23, 2014 The respondent victim in this case was sexually abused as a young girl in order to produce child pornography. When she was 17, she learned that images of her abuse were being trafficked on the Internet, in effect repeating the original wrongs, for she knew that her humiliation and hurt would be renewed well into the future as thousands of additional wrongdoers witnessed those crimes. Petitioner P...
White Vs. Woodall
Court: US Supreme Court
Decided on: Apr-23-2014
White v. Woodall 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 WHITE, WARDEN v. WOODALL certiorari to the united states court of appeals for the sixth circuit No. 12794.Argued December 11, 2013Decided April 23, 2014 Respondent pleaded guilty to capital murder, capital kidnaping, and first-degree rape, the statutory aggravating circumstance for the murder. He was sentenced to death after the trial court denied defense counsels request to instruct the jury not to draw any adverse inference from respondents decision not to testify at the penalty phase. The Kentucky Supreme Court affirmed, finding that the Fifth Amendments requi...
Prado Navarette Vs. California
Court: US Supreme Court
Decided on: Apr-22-2014
Navarette v. California 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 PRADO NAVARETTE et al. v. CALIFORNIA certiorari to the court of appeal of california, first appellate district No. 129490.Argued January 21, 2014Decided April 22, 2014 A California Highway Patrol officer stopped the pickup truck occupied by petitioners because it matched the description of a vehicle that a 911 caller had recently reported as having run her off the road. As he and a second officer approached the truck, they smelled marijuana. They searched the trucks bed, found 30 pounds of marijuana, and arrested petitioners. Petitioners moved to suppress ...
Schuette Vs. Bamn
Court: US Supreme Court
Decided on: Apr-22-2014
Schuette v. Coal. Defend Affirmative Action, Integration & Immigration Rights 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 SCHUETTE, ATTORNEY GENERAL OF MICHIGAN v. COALITION TO DEFEND AFFIRMATIVE ACTION, INTEGRATION AND IMMIGRATION RIGHTS AND FIGHT FOR EQUALITY BY ANY MEANS NECESSARY (BAMN) et al. certiorari to the united states court of appeals for the sixth circuit No. 12682.Argued October 15, 2013 Decided April 22, 2014 After this Court decided that the University of Michigans undergraduate admissions plans use of race-based preferences violated the Equal Protection Clause, Gratz v. Bollinge...
Northwest, Inc. Vs. Ginsberg
Court: US Supreme Court
Decided on: Apr-02-2014
Northwest, Inc. v. Ginsberg 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 NORTHWEST, INC., et al. v. GINSBERG certiorari to the united states court of appeals for the ninth circuit No. 12462.Argued December 3, 2013Decided April 2, 2014 Petitioner Northwest, Inc., terminated respondents membership in its frequent flyer program, apparently based on a provision in the frequent flyer agreement that gave Northwest sole discretion to determine whether a participant had abused the program. Respondent filed suit, asserting, as relevant here, that Northwest had breached its contract by revoking his membership status without valid cau...
Mccutcheon Vs. Federal Election Comm’n
Court: US Supreme Court
Decided on: Apr-02-2014
McCutcheon v. Fed. Election Commn 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 McCUTCHEON et al. v. FEDERAL ELECTION COMMISSION appeal from the united states district court for the district of columbia No. 12536.Argued October 8, 2013Decided April 2, 2014 The right to participate in democracy through political contributions is protected by the First Amendment, but that right is not absolute. Congress may regulate campaign contributions to protect against corruption or the appearance of corruption. See, e.g., Buckley v. Valeo, 424 U. S. 127. It may not, however, regulate contributions simply to reduce the amount of money...
- ‹ Prev
- Next ›