 |
|
 |
|
|
Access State and Federal Case Law, plus U.S. Supreme Court cases — for free!
Click on any of the case links below to view the full text of that case — for free — through lexisONE®, a legal research and news service from LexisNexis®. Login is required — registration is free!
While viewing the full text of the case, select from upgrade options to Shepardize® or view the fully-featured case on lexis.com including Core Terms, Shepard's® Signals, Case Summaries, Print Options, and more. lexisONE offers access to comprehensive content and flexible services for faster, more efficient legal research. Review our flexible LexisNexis® subscriptions offered through daily, weekly or monthly research packages.
| Gutierrez v. Ada, No. 99-51,
SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES, January 19, 2000, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Court reversed a judgment for respondent defeated gubernatorial candidates since Organic Act of Guam provision requiring a runoff election if candidates did not receive a majority of votes cast in "any election" meant the gubernatorial election.
|
|||||
| Smith v. Robbins, No. 98-1037,
SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES, January 19, 2000, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: California's Wende procedure was not unconstitutional because it diverged from Anders procedure, and its system did not violate Fourteenth Amendment, for it provided criminal appellant with minimum safeguards necessary to make an effective appeal.
|
|||||
| United States v. Martinez-Salazar, No. 98-1255,
SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES, January 19, 2000, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Respondent's due process rights were not violated when a judge erroneously refused to dismiss a juror for cause forcing respondent to use a peremptory challenge because respondent was not forced to use the challenge and freely elected to do so.
|
|||||
| Weeks v. Angelone, No. 99-5746,
SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES, January 19, 2000, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Request for habeas relief was properly denied because there was no constitutional violation when the trial judge directed the jury to constitutionally adequate instruction regarding mitigating evidence in response to inquiry regarding mitigation.
|
|||||
| Nixon v. Shrink Mo. Gov't Pac, No. 98-963,
SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES, January 24, 2000, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: A Missouri law that limited contributions to state political candidates did not violate the First Amendment because the prevention of corruption and the appearance of corruption was a legitimate government purpose.
|
|||||
| Reno v. Bossier Parish Sch. Bd., Nos. 98-405, 98-406,
SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES, January 24, 2000, * Decided* Together with No. 98-406, Price et al. v. Bossier Parish School Bd., also on appeal from the same court.
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: The Voting Rights Act did not prohibit preclearance of a redistricting plan enacted with a discriminatory but non-retrogressive purpose.
|
|||||
| Baral v. United States, No. 98-1667,
SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES, February 22, 2000, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Court upheld a judgment for the IRS holding that for purposes of a provision imposing a ceiling on the amount of credit a taxpayer could receive for overpayment, estimated tax or withholding payments were "paid" on the due date for filing return.
|
|||||
| Hunt-Wesson, Inc. v. Franchise Tax Bd., No. 98-2043,
SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES, February 22, 2000, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Offset provision of state tax law that measured allowable interest expense deduction based on interest and dividends of nonunitary income was impermissible taxation of petitioner's income, outside the state's jurisdictional reach.
|
|||||
| Weisgram v. Marley Co., No. 99-161,
SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES, February 22, 2000, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: The authority of courts of appeals to direct the entry of judgment as a matter of law extended to cases in which, on excision of testimony erroneously admitted, there remained insufficient evidence to support the jury's verdict.
|
|||||
Back to Top
| www.lexisnexis.com | About LexisNexis | Terms & Conditions | Customer Support | Contact Us |
| Copyright® 2009 LexisNexis , a division of Reed Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved. |
