www.lawrepository.com, Supreme Court of the United States, 2000

Year 2000 Supreme Court of the United States Slip Opinions

 cases in 2000

981682c1.txt.htm  05/22/00      5012 bytes  (45 hits)
              UNITED STATES v. PLAYBOY ENTERTAINMENTGROUP, INC.

981682zc.txt.htm  05/22/00      2893 bytes  (11 hits)
              UNITED STATES v.PLAYBOY ENTERTAINMENTGROUP, INC.

981682zd.txt.htm  05/22/00     12923 bytes  (8 hits)
              UNITED STATES v. PLAYBOY ENTERTAINMENTGROUP, INC.

981682zo.txt.htm  05/22/00     51780 bytes  (9 hits)
              UNITED STATES v. PLAYBOY ENTERTAINMENTGROUP, INC.

981682zs.txt.htm  05/22/00      9890 bytes  (3 hits)
              UNITED STATES v. PLAYBOY ENTERTAINMENTGROUP, INC.

981682~1.TXT.htm  05/22/00     31071 bytes  (8 hits)
              UNITED STATES v. PLAYBOY ENTERTAINMENTGROUP, INC.

981811zd.txt.htm  05/22/00     70477 bytes  (13 hits)
              GEIER v.  AMERICAN HONDA MOTOR CO.

981811zo.txt.htm  05/22/00     53959 bytes  (5 hits)
              GEIER v.  AMERICAN HONDA MOTOR CO.

981811zs.txt.htm  05/22/00      9020 bytes  (5 hits)
              GEIER v.  AMERICAN HONDA MOTOR CO.

981828c1.txt.htm  05/22/00      3823 bytes  (12 hits)
              VERMONT AGENCY OF NATURAL RESOURCES v. UNITED
              STATES

981828zc.txt.htm  05/22/00      1064 bytes  (5 hits)
              VERMONT AGENCY OF NATURAL RESOURCES v. UNITED
              STATES

981828zd.txt.htm  05/22/00     36267 bytes  (5 hits)
              VERMONT AGENCY OF NATURAL RESOURCES v. UNITED
              STATES

981828zo.txt.htm  05/22/00     57049 bytes  (4 hits)
              VERMONT AGENCY OF NATURAL RESOURCES v. UNITED
              STATES

981828zs.txt.htm  05/22/00      6853 bytes  (6 hits)
              VERMONT AGENCY OF NATURAL RESOURCES v. UNITED
              STATES

989828zd.txt.htm  05/22/00     12273 bytes  (4 hits)
              MARIA SUZUKI OHLER, PETITIONER v. UNITED STATES

989828zo.txt.htm  05/22/00     14857 bytes  (1 hits)
              MARIA SUZUKI OHLER, PETITIONER v. UNITED STATES

989828zs.txt.htm  05/22/00      4215 bytes  (4 hits)
              OHLER v. UNITED STATES

995739c1.txt.htm  05/22/00      1114 bytes  (3 hits)
              JONES v. UNITED STATES

995739zc.txt.htm  05/22/00      3312 bytes  (5 hits)
              DEWEY J. JONES, PETITIONER v. UNITED STATES

995739zo.txt.htm  05/22/00     24406 bytes  (3 hits)
              DEWEY J. JONES, PETITIONER v. UNITED STATES

995739zs.txt.htm  05/22/00      8729 bytes  (1 hits)
              JONES v. UNITED STATES

99781zd.txt.htm   05/22/00     17131 bytes  (12 hits)
              AVIS RENT A CAR SYSTEM, INC. v. AGUILAR

981991zc.txt.htm  05/15/00      4585 bytes  (40 hits)
              PUBLIC LANDS COUNCIL ET AL. v. BABBITT,
              SECRETARY OF THE INTERIOR, ET AL.
              CERTIORARI TO THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
              FOR THE TENTH CIRCUIT
              No. 98-1991. 
              Argued March 1, 2000
              Decided May 15, 2000
              Concurrence

981991zo.txt.htm  05/15/00     45508 bytes  (23 hits)
              PUBLIC LANDS COUNCIL ET AL. v. BABBITT,
              SECRETARY OF THE INTERIOR, ET AL.
              CERTIORARI TO THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
              FOR THE TENTH CIRCUIT
              No. 98-1991. 
              Argued March 1, 2000
              Decided May 15, 2000
              Opinion

981991zs.txt.htm  05/15/00      8360 bytes  (13 hits)
              PUBLIC LANDS COUNCIL ET AL. v. BABBITT,
              SECRETARY OF THE INTERIOR, ET AL.
              CERTIORARI TO THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
              FOR THE TENTH CIRCUIT
              No. 98-1991. 
              Argued March 1, 2000
              Decided May 15, 2000
              Syllabus

99-116zd.txt.htm  05/15/00     27636 bytes  (26 hits)
              FISCHER v. UNITED STATES
              CERTIORARI TO THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
              FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT
              No. 99-116. 
              Argued February 22, 2000
              Decided May 15, 2000
              Dissent

99-116zo.txt.htm  05/15/00     29963 bytes  (9 hits)
              FISCHER v. UNITED STATES
              CERTIORARI TO THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
              FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT
              No. 99-116. 
              Argued February 22, 2000
              Decided May 15, 2000
              Opinion

99-116zs.txt.htm  05/15/00      8005 bytes  (7 hits)
              FISCHER v. UNITED STATES
              CERTIORARI TO THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
              FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT
              No. 99-116. 
              Argued February 22, 2000
              Decided May 15, 2000
              Syllabus

99-5zc.txt.htm    05/15/00      2218 bytes  (34 hits)
              UNITED STATES v. MORRISON ET AL.
              CERTIORARI TO THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
              FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
              No. 99-5. 
              Argued January 11, 2000
              Decided May 15, 2000*
              Concurrence
              * Together with No. 99-29, Brzonkala v. Morrison
              et al., also on certiorari to the same court.

99-5zd.txt.htm    05/15/00     72404 bytes  (25 hits)
              UNITED STATES v. MORRISON ET AL.
              CERTIORARI TO THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
              FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
              No. 99-5. 
              Argued January 11, 2000
              Decided May 15, 2000*
              Dissent
              * Together with No. 99-29, Brzonkala v. Morrison
              et al., also on certiorari to the same court.

99-5zd1.txt.htm   05/15/00     28569 bytes  (14 hits)
              UNITED STATES v. MORRISON ET AL.
              CERTIORARI TO THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
              FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
              No. 99-5. 
              Argued January 11, 2000
              Decided May 15, 2000*
              Another Dissent
              * Together with No. 99-29, Brzonkala v. Morrison
              et al., also on certiorari to the same court.

99-5zo.txt.htm    05/15/00     67478 bytes  (27 hits)
              UNITED STATES v. MORRISON ET AL.
              CERTIORARI TO THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
              FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
              No. 99-5. 
              Argued January 11, 2000
              Decided May 15, 2000*
              Opinion
              * Together with No. 99-29, Brzonkala v. Morrison
              et al., also on certiorari to the same court.

99-5zs.txt.htm    05/15/00      9060 bytes  (20 hits)
              UNITED STATES v. MORRISON ET AL.
              CERTIORARI TO THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
              FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
              No. 99-5. 
              Argued January 11, 2000
              Decided May 15, 2000*
              Syllabus
              * Together with No. 99-29, Brzonkala v. Morrison
              et al., also on certiorari to the same court.

995153c1.txt.htm  05/15/00      1511 bytes  (8 hits)
              JOHNSON v. UNITED STATES
              CERTIORARI TO THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
              FOR THE SIXTH CIRCUIT
              No. 99-5153. 
              Argued February 22, 2000
              Decided May 15, 2000
              Another Concurrence

995153zc.txt.htm  05/15/00      4572 bytes  (2 hits)
              JOHNSON v. UNITED STATES
              CERTIORARI TO THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
              FOR THE SIXTH CIRCUIT
              No. 99-5153. 
              Argued February 22, 2000
              Decided May 15, 2000
              Concurrence

995153zd.txt.htm  05/15/00     34357 bytes  (1 hits)
              JOHNSON v. UNITED STATES
              CERTIORARI TO THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
              FOR THE SIXTH CIRCUIT
              No. 99-5153. 
              Argued February 22, 2000
              Decided May 15, 2000
              Dissent

995153zo.txt.htm  05/15/00     46052 bytes  (4 hits)
              JOHNSON v. UNITED STATES
              CERTIORARI TO THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
              FOR THE SIXTH CIRCUIT
              No. 99-5153. 
              Argued February 22, 2000
              Decided May 15, 2000
              Opinion

995153zs.txt.htm  05/15/00      7941 bytes  (9 hits)
              JOHNSON v. UNITED STATES
              CERTIORARI TO THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
              FOR THE SIXTH CIRCUIT
              No. 99-5153. 
              Argued February 22, 2000
              Decided May 15, 2000
              Syllabus

981167c1.txt.htm  05/01/00      8379 bytes  (84 hits)
              CHRISTENSEN ET AL. v. HARRIS COUNTY ET AL.
              CERTIORARI TO THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
              FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT
              No. 98-1167. 
              Argued February 23, 2000
              Decided May 1, 2000
              Another Concurrence

981167d1.txt.htm  05/01/00      4408 bytes  (18 hits)
              CHRISTENSEN ET AL. v. HARRIS COUNTY ET AL.
              CERTIORARI TO THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
              FOR
              THE FIFTH CIRCUIT
              No. 98-1167. 
              Argued February 23, 2000
              Decided May 1, 2000
              Another Dissent

981167zc.txt.htm  05/01/00      1058 bytes  (6 hits)
              CHRISTENSEN ET AL. v. HARRIS COUNTY ET AL.
              CERTIORARI TO THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
              FOR
              THE FIFTH CIRCUIT
              No. 98-1167. 
              Argued February 23, 2000
              Decided May 1, 2000
              Concurrence

981167zd.txt.htm  05/01/00     10363 bytes  (8 hits)
              CHRISTENSEN ET AL. v. HARRIS COUNTY ET AL.
              CERTIORARI TO THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
              FOR
              THE FIFTH CIRCUIT
              No. 98-1167. 
              Argued February 23, 2000
              Decided May 1, 2000
              Dissent

981167zo.txt.htm  05/01/00     27499 bytes  (27 hits)
              CHRISTENSEN ET AL. v. HARRIS COUNTY ET AL.
              CERTIORARI TO THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
              FOR
              THE FIFTH CIRCUIT
              No. 98-1167. 
              Argued February 23, 2000
              Decided May 1, 2000
              Opinion

981167zs.txt.htm  05/01/00      6495 bytes  (15 hits)
              CHRISTENSEN ET AL. v. HARRIS COUNTY ET AL.
              CERTIORARI TO THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
              FOR
              THE FIFTH CIRCUIT
              No. 98-1167. 
              Argued February 23, 2000
              Decided May 1, 2000
              Syllabus

987540zd.txt.htm  05/01/00     59375 bytes  (10 hits)
              CARMELL v. TEXAS
              CERTIORARI TO THE COURT OF APPEALS OF TEXAS,
              SECOND DISTRICT
              No. 98-7540. 
              Argued November 30, 1999
              Decided May 1, 2000
              Dissent

987540zo.txt.htm  05/01/00    102043 bytes  (8 hits)
              CARMELL v. TEXAS
              CERTIORARI TO THE COURT OF APPEALS OF TEXAS,
              SECOND DISTRICT
              No. 98-7540. 
              Argued November 30, 1999
              Decided May 1, 2000
              Opinion

987540zs.txt.htm  05/01/00      9352 bytes  (5 hits)
              CARMELL v. TEXAS
              CERTIORARI TO THE COURT OF APPEALS OF TEXAS,
              SECOND DISTRICT
              No. 98-7540. 
              Argued November 30, 1999
              Decided May 1, 2000
              Syllabus

981480zd.txt.htm  04/26/00     16817 bytes  (33 hits)
              BECK v. PRUPIS ET AL.
              CERTIORARI TO THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
              FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT
              No. 98-1480. 
              Argued November 3, 1999
              Decided April 26, 2000
              Dissent

981480zo.txt.htm  04/26/00     32747 bytes  (19 hits)
              BECK v. PRUPIS ET AL.
              CERTIORARI TO THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
              FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT
              No. 98-1480. 
              Argued November 3, 1999
              Decided April 26, 2000
              Opinion

981480zs.txt.htm  04/26/00      4898 bytes  (7 hits)
              BECK v. PRUPIS ET AL.
              CERTIORARI TO THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
              FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT
              No. 98-1480. 
              Argued November 3, 1999
              Decided April 26, 2000
              Syllabus

986322zc.txt.htm  04/26/00      2557 bytes  (11 hits)
              SLACK v. MCDANIEL, WARDEN, ET AL.
              CERTIORARI TO THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
              FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
              No. 98-6322. 
              Argued October 4, 1999
              Reargued March 29, 2000
              Decided April 26, 2000
              Concurrence

986322zo.txt.htm  04/26/00     29845 bytes  (9 hits)
              SLACK v. MCDANIEL, WARDEN, ET AL.
              CERTIORARI TO THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
              FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
              No. 98-6322. 
              Argued October 4, 1999
              Reargued March 29, 2000
              Decided April 26, 2000
              Opinion

986322zs.txt.htm  04/26/00     13653 bytes  (3 hits)
              SLACK v. MCDANIEL, WARDEN, ET AL.
              CERTIORARI TO THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
              FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
              No. 98-6322. 
              Argued October 4, 1999
              Reargued March 29, 2000
              Decided April 26, 2000
              Syllabus

986322zx.txt.htm  04/26/00      6987 bytes  (5 hits)
              SLACK v. MCDANIEL, WARDEN, ET AL.
              CERTIORARI TO THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
              FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
              No. 98-6322. 
              Argued October 4, 1999
              Reargued March 29, 2000
              Decided April 26, 2000
              Concurrence/Dissent

982060zc.txt.htm  04/25/00     12474 bytes  (19 hits)
              EDWARDS, WARDEN v. CARPENTER
              CERTIORARI TO THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
              FOR THE SIXTH CIRCUIT
              No. 98-2060. 
              Argued February 28, 2000
              Decided April 25, 2000
              Concurrence

982060zo.txt.htm  04/25/00     16168 bytes  (10 hits)
              EDWARDS, WARDEN v. CARPENTER
              CERTIORARI TO THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
              FOR THE SIXTH CIRCUIT
              No. 98-2060. 
              Argued February 28, 2000
              Decided April 25, 2000
              Opinion

982060zs.txt.htm  04/25/00      5691 bytes  (8 hits)
              EDWARDS, WARDEN v. CARPENTER
              CERTIORARI TO THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
              FOR THE SIXTH CIRCUIT
              No. 98-2060. 
              Argued February 28, 2000
              Decided April 25, 2000
              Syllabus

99502zo.txt.htm   04/25/00     24073 bytes  (15 hits)
              NELSON v. ADAMS USA, INC., ET AL.
              CERTIORARI TO THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
              FOR THE FEDERAL CIRCUIT
              No. 99-502. 
              Argued March 27, 2000
              Decided April 25, 2000
              Opinion

99502zs.txt.htm   04/25/00      8593 bytes  (6 hits)
              NELSON v. ADAMS USA, INC., ET AL.
              CERTIORARI TO THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
              FOR THE FEDERAL CIRCUIT
              No. 99-502. 
              Argued March 27, 2000
              Decided April 25, 2000
              Syllabus

988384zc.txt.htm  04/18/00     43705 bytes  (90 hits)
              WILLIAMS v. TAYLOR, WARDEN
              CERTIORARI TO THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
              FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
              No. 98-8384. 
              Argued October 4, 1999
              Decided April 18, 2000
              Concurrence

988384zo.txt.htm  04/18/00     86835 bytes  (29 hits)
              WILLIAMS v. TAYLOR, WARDEN
              CERTIORARI TO THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
              FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
              No. 98-8384. 
              Argued October 4, 1999
              Decided April 18, 2000
              Opinion

988384zs.txt.htm  04/18/00     14499 bytes  (18 hits)
              WILLIAMS v. TAYLOR, WARDEN
              CERTIORARI TO THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
              FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
              No. 98-8384. 
              Argued October 4, 1999
              Decided April 18, 2000
              Syllabus

988384zx.txt.htm  04/18/00      8466 bytes  (17 hits)
              WILLIAMS v. TAYLOR, WARDEN
              CERTIORARI TO THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
              FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
              No. 98-8384. 
              Argued October 4, 1999
              Decided April 18, 2000
              Concurrence/Dissent

996615zo.txt.htm  04/18/00     49376 bytes  (15 hits)
              WILLIAMS v. TAYLOR, WARDEN
              CERTIORARI TO THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
              FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
              No. 99-6615. 
              Argued February 28, 2000
              Decided April 18, 2000
              Opinion

996615zs.txt.htm  04/18/00     11818 bytes  (17 hits)
              WILLIAMS v. TAYLOR, WARDEN
              CERTIORARI TO THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
              FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
              No. 99-6615. 
              Argued February 28, 2000
              Decided April 18, 2000
              Syllabus

99312zc.txt.htm   04/17/00      2690 bytes  (24 hits)
              NORFOLK SOUTHERN RAILWAY CO. v. SHANKLIN,
              INDIVIDUALLY AND AS NEXT FRIEND OF SHANKLIN
              CERTIORARI TO THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
              FOR THE SIXTH CIRCUIT
              No. 99-312. 
              Argued March 1, 2000
              Decided April 17, 2000
              Concurrence

99312zd.txt.htm   04/17/00      5154 bytes  (16 hits)
              NORFOLK SOUTHERN RAILWAY CO. v. SHANKLIN,
              INDIVIDUALLY AND AS NEXT FRIEND OF SHANKLIN
              CERTIORARI TO THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
              FOR THE SIXTH CIRCUIT
              No. 99-312. 
              Argued March 1, 2000
              Decided April 17, 2000
              Dissent

99312zo.txt.htm   04/17/00     30976 bytes  (25 hits)
              NORFOLK SOUTHERN RAILWAY CO. v. SHANKLIN,
              INDIVIDUALLY AND AS NEXT FRIEND OF SHANKLIN
              CERTIORARI TO THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
              FOR THE SIXTH CIRCUIT
              No. 99-312. 
              Argued March 1, 2000
              Decided April 17, 2000
              Opinion

99312zs.txt.htm   04/17/00      6560 bytes  (21 hits)
              NORFOLK SOUTHERN RAILWAY CO. v. SHANKLIN,
              INDIVIDUALLY AND AS NEXT FRIEND OF SHANKLIN
              CERTIORARI TO THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
              FOR THE SIXTH CIRCUIT
              No. 99-312. 
              Argued March 1, 2000
              Decided April 17, 2000
              Syllabus

99391zpc.txt.htm  04/04/00       961 bytes  (41 hits)
              ROBIN FREE, ET AL., PETITIONERS v. ABBOTT
              LABORATORIES, INC., ET AL.
              ON WRIT OF CERTIORARI TO THE UNITED STATES COURT
              OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT
              [April 3, 2000]
              PER CURIAM.
              The judgment is affirmed by an equally divided
              Court.
              JUSTICE O’ CONNOR took no part in the
              consideration or decision of this case.

981161zc.txt.htm  03/29/00     22726 bytes  (46 hits)
              CITY OF ERIE ET AL. v. PAP’ S A. M., TDBA
              "KANDYLAND"
              CERTIORARI TO THE SUPREME COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA
              No. 98-1161.
              Argued November 10, 1999
              Decided March 29, 2000
              Concurrence

981161zd.txt.htm  03/29/00     42722 bytes  (18 hits)
              CITY OF ERIE ET AL. v. PAP’ S A. M., TDBA
              "KANDYLAND"
              CERTIORARI TO THE SUPREME COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA
              No. 98-1161.
              Argued November 10, 1999
              Decided March 29, 2000
              Dissent

981161zo.txt.htm  03/29/00     49782 bytes  (13 hits)
              CITY OF ERIE ET AL. v. PAP’ S A. M., TDBA
              "KANDYLAND"
              CERTIORARI TO THE SUPREME COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA
              No. 98-1161.
              Argued November 10, 1999
              Decided March 29, 2000
              Opinion

981161zs.txt.htm  03/29/00     17933 bytes  (10 hits)
              CITY OF ERIE ET AL. v. PAP’ S A. M., TDBA
              "KANDYLAND"
              CERTIORARI TO THE SUPREME COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA
              No. 98-1161.
              Argued November 10, 1999
              Decided March 29, 2000
              Syllabus

981161zx.txt.htm  03/29/00     18906 bytes  (11 hits)
              CITY OF ERIE ET AL. v. PAP’ S A. M., TDBA
              "KANDYLAND"
              CERTIORARI TO THE SUPREME COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA
              No. 98-1161.
              Argued November 10, 1999
              Decided March 29, 2000
              Concur/Dissent

981993zc.txt.htm  03/28/00      5223 bytes  (16 hits)
              FLORIDA v. J. L.
              CERTIORARI TO THE SUPREME COURT OF FLORIDA
              No. 98 1993. 
              Argued February 29, 2000
              Decided March 28, 2000
              Concurrence

981993zo.txt.htm  03/28/00     16605 bytes  (11 hits)
              FLORIDA v. J. L.
              CERTIORARI TO THE SUPREME COURT OF FLORIDA
              No. 98 1993. 
              Argued February 29, 2000
              Decided March 28, 2000
              Opinion

981993zs.txt.htm  03/28/00      4628 bytes  (6 hits)
              FLORIDA v. J. L.
              CERTIORARI TO THE SUPREME COURT OF FLORIDA
              No. 98 1993. 
              Argued February 29, 2000
              Decided March 28, 2000
              Syllabus

99137zc.txt.htm   03/28/00      6503 bytes  (6 hits)
              GARNER, FORMER CHAIRMAN OF THE STATE
              BOARD OF PARDONS AND PAROLES OF 
              GEORGIA, ET AL. v. JONES
              CERTIORARI TO THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
              FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT
              No. 99-137. 
              Argued January 11, 2000
              Decided March 28, 2000
              Concurrence

99137zd.txt.htm   03/28/00     14872 bytes  (1 hits)
              GARNER, FORMER CHAIRMAN OF THE STATE
              BOARD OF PARDONS AND PAROLES OF 
              GEORGIA, ET AL. v. JONES
              CERTIORARI TO THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
              FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT
              No. 99-137. 
              Argued January 11, 2000
              Decided March 28, 2000
              Dissent

99137zo.txt.htm   03/28/00     27682 bytes  (8 hits)
              GARNER, FORMER CHAIRMAN OF THE STATE
              BOARD OF PARDONS AND PAROLES OF 
              GEORGIA, ET AL. v. JONES
              CERTIORARI TO THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
              FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT
              No. 99-137. 
              Argued January 11, 2000
              Decided March 28, 2000
              Opinion

99137zs.txt.htm   03/28/00      8192 bytes  (2 hits)
              GARNER, FORMER CHAIRMAN OF THE STATE
              BOARD OF PARDONS AND PAROLES OF 
              GEORGIA, ET AL. v. JONES
              CERTIORARI TO THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
              FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT
              No. 99-137. 
              Argued January 11, 2000
              Decided March 28, 2000
              Syllabus

99-697zd.txt.htm  03/27/00     13230 bytes  (2 hits)
              Dissent from Denial of Cert.

981189zc.txt.htm  03/22/00     20754 bytes  (14 hits)
              BOARD OF REGENTS OF THE UNIVERSITY OF
              WISCONSIN SYSTEM v. SOUTHWORTH ET AL.
              CERTIORARI TO THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
              FOR THE SEVENTH CIRCUIT
              No. 98-1189. Argued November 9, 1999
              Decided March 22, 2000
              Concurrence

981189zo.txt.htm  03/22/00     36119 bytes  (9 hits)
              BOARD OF REGENTS OF THE UNIVERSITY OF
              WISCONSIN SYSTEM v. SOUTHWORTH ET AL.
              CERTIORARI TO THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
              FOR THE SEVENTH CIRCUIT
              No. 98-1189. Argued November 9, 1999
              Decided March 22, 2000
              Opinion

981189zs.txt.htm  03/22/00      9030 bytes  (8 hits)
              BOARD OF REGENTS OF THE UNIVERSITY OF
              WISCONSIN SYSTEM v. SOUTHWORTH ET AL.
              CERTIORARI TO THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
              FOR THE SEVENTH CIRCUIT
              No. 98-1189. Argued November 9, 1999
              Decided March 22, 2000
              Syllabus

99-150zo.txt.htm  03/22/00     22876 bytes  (14 hits)
              WAL-MART STORES, INC. v. SAMARA BROTHERS,
              INC.
              CERTIORARI TO THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
              FOR THE SECOND CIRCUIT
              No. 99-150. Argued January 19, 2000
              Decided March 22, 2000
              Opinion

99-150zs.txt.htm  03/22/00      6319 bytes  (11 hits)
              WAL-MART STORES, INC. v. SAMARA BROTHERS,
              INC.
              CERTIORARI TO THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
              FOR THE SECOND CIRCUIT
              No. 99-150. Argued January 19, 2000
              Decided March 22, 2000
              Syllabus

R021.txt.htm      03/21/00     17067 bytes  (4 hits)
              R021; 1/19/00.   Anders v. California, 386 U. S.
              738, sets out one procedure for determining
              whether an indigent's direct appeal is frivolous,
              but States are free to adopt other procedures so
              long as they adequately safeguard a defendant's
              Fourteenth Amendment right to appellate counsel;
              California's procedure is adequate.  Syllabus.
              98-1037

R021B.txt.htm     03/21/00     29921 bytes  (2 hits)
              R021B; 1/19/00.   Anders v. California, 386 U. S.
              738, sets out one procedure for determining
              whether an indigent's direct appeal is frivolous,
              but States are free to adopt other procedures so
              long as they adequately safeguard a defendant's
              Fourteenth Amendment right to appellate counsel;
              California's procedure is adequate.  Souter, J.,
              dissenting.
              98-1037

R021O.txt.htm     03/21/00     68399 bytes  (0 hits)
              R021-O; 1/19/00.   Anders v. California, 386 U.
              S. 738, sets out one procedure for determining
              whether an indigent's direct appeal is frivolous,
              but States are free to adopt other procedures so
              long as they adequately safeguard a defendant's
              Fourteenth Amendment right to appellate counsel;
              California's procedure is adequate.  Thomas, J.,
              opinion.
              98-1037

R022.txt.htm      03/21/00     10447 bytes  (1 hits)
              R022; 1/19/00. A defendant's exercise of
              peremptory challenges pursuant to Federal Rule of
              Criminal Procedure 24 is not denied or impaired
              when the defendant chooses to use such a
              challenge to remove a juror who should have been
              excused for cause.  Syllabus.
              98-1255

R022B.txt.htm     03/21/00      3725 bytes  (0 hits)
              R022B; 1/19/00. A defendant's exercise of
              peremptory challenges pursuant to Federal Rule of
              Criminal Procedure 24 is not denied or impaired
              when the defendant chooses to use such a
              challenge to remove a juror who should have been
              excused for cause.  Scalia, J., concurring in the
              judgment.F.R.Cr.P.-24 Jury-selection 

R022O.txt.htm     03/21/00     27695 bytes  (0 hits)
              R022-O; 1/19/00. A defendant's exercise of
              peremptory challenges pursuant to Federal Rule of
              Criminal Procedure 24 is not denied or impaired
              when the defendant chooses to use such a
              challenge to remove a juror who should have been
              excused for cause.  Ginsburg, J., opinion.
              F.R.Cr.P.-24 Jury-selection 

R036.txt.htm      03/21/00     13225 bytes  (18 hits)
              FDA v. Brown & Williamson Tobacco Corp. 
              98-1152.ZS.  3/21/00. Reading the Food, Drug, and
              Cosmetic Act as a whole, as well as in
              conjunction with Congress' subsequent
              tobacco-specific legislation, it is plain that
              Congress has not given the Food and Drug
              Administration the authority to assert
              jurisdiction over tobacco products.  Syllabus.

R036A.txt.htm     03/21/00     74727 bytes  (3 hits)
              FDA v. Brown & Williamson Tobacco Corp. 
              98-1152.ZD.  3/21/00. Breyer, J., dissenting.

R036O.txt.htm     03/21/00     87555 bytes  (4 hits)
              FDA v. Brown & Williamson Tobacco Corp. 
              98-1152.ZO.  3/21/00. O'Connor, J., opinion.

R037.txt.htm      03/21/00      6573 bytes  (2 hits)
              Cortez Byrd Chips, Inc. v. Bill Harbert Constr.
              Co.  98-1960.ZS.  3/21/00.  The venue provisions
              of the Federal Arbitration Act are permissive,
              allowing a motion to confirm, vacate, or modify
              an arbitra-tion award to be brought either in the
              district where the award was made or in any
              district proper under the general venue statute. 
              Syllabus.

R037O.txt.htm     03/21/00     24412 bytes  (0 hits)
              Cortez Byrd Chips, Inc. v. Bill Harbert Constr.
              Co.  98-1960.ZO.  3/21/00.  Souter, J., opinion.

989183D.txt.htm   03/17/00     11924 bytes  (4 hits)
              98-9183; Jeffrey Steven Marx, Petitioner, v.
              Texas
              Decided November 29, 1999. Scalia, J.,
              Dissenting.

989741A.txt.htm   03/17/00     11186 bytes  (2 hits)
              98-9741 and 99-5291; Thomas Knight, AKA Askan
              Abdullah Muhammad v. Florida and Carey Dean Moore
              v. Nebraska
              Decided November 8, 1999. Thomas, J., concurring.

989741D.txt.htm   03/17/00     20136 bytes  (2 hits)
              98-9741 and 99-5291; Thomas Knight, AKA Askan
              Abdullah Muhammad v. Florida and Carey Dean Moore
              v. Nebraska
              Decided November 8, 1999. Breyer, J., dissenting.

99323D.txt.htm    03/17/00     10073 bytes  (3 hits)
              99-323; Edward Hanousek, jr. v. United States.
              Decided January 10, 2000. Thomas, J., dissenting.

R020.txt.htm      03/15/00      5193 bytes  (1 hits)
              R020; 1/19/00.  The Guam Organic Act does not
              require a runoff election when a candidate slate
              has received a majority of the votes cast for
              Governor and Lieutenant Governor of the
              Territory, but not a majority of the number of
              ballots cast in the simultaneous general
              election.  Syllabus.
              99-51 Syllabus Gutierrez Ada Souter,J. 48USC1422
              Elections Votes

R033.txt.htm      03/10/00     25393 bytes  (4 hits)
              R033; 3/1/00.  This Court is bound by the
              controlling statute, 18 U. S. C. sec. 3624(e),
              which, by its necessary operation, does not
              reduce the length of a supervised release term by
              reason of excess time served in prison. 
              Syllabus.
              98-1696 U.S. Johnson 18USC3624(e) Kennedy,J.
              Criminal-law Release

R033O.txt.htm     03/10/00     15717 bytes  (1 hits)
              R033-O; 3/1/00.  This Court is bound by the
              controlling statute, 18 U. S. C. sec. 3624(e),
              which, by its necessary operation, does not
              reduce the length of a supervised release term by
              reason of excess time served in prison.  Kennedy,
              J., opinion.
              98-1696 U.S. Johnson 18USC3624(e) Kennedy,J.
              Criminal-law Release

R034.txt.htm      03/10/00      6703 bytes  (1 hits)
              R034; 3/6/00.  A prosecutor's comments that
              respondent had the opportunity to hear all other
              witnesses before testifying and tailor his
              testimony accordingly did not violate his Fifth
              and Sixth Amendment rights to be present at trial
              and confront his accusers or his Fourteenth
              Amendment right to due process.  Syllabus.
              98-1170

R034A.txt.htm     03/10/00      2496 bytes  (0 hits)
              R034A; 3/6/00.  A prosecutor's comments that
              respondent had the opportunity to hear all other
              witnesses before testifying and tailor his
              testimony accordingly did not violate his Fifth
              and Sixth Amendment rights to be present at trial
              and confront his accusers or his Fourteenth
              Amendment right to due process.  Stevens, J.,
              concurring in judgement.
              98-1170

R034B.txt.htm     03/10/00     31472 bytes  (0 hits)
              R034B; 3/6/00.  A prosecutor's comments that
              respondent had the opportunity to hear all other
              witnesses before testifying and tailor his
              testimony accordingly did not violate his Fifth
              and Sixth Amendment rights to be present at trial
              and confront his accusers or his Fourteenth
              Amendment right to due process.  Ginsburg, J.,
              dissenting.R034B; 3/6/00.  
              98-1170

R034O.txt.htm     03/10/00     35553 bytes  (0 hits)
              R034-O; 3/6/00.  A prosecutor's comments that
              respondent had the opportunity to hear all other
              witnesses before testifying and tailor his
              testimony accordingly did not violate his Fifth
              and Sixth Amendment rights to be present at trial
              and confront his accusers or his Fourteenth
              Amendment right to due process.  Scalia, J.,
              opinion.
              98-1170

R035.txt.htm      03/10/00     12822 bytes  (2 hits)
              R035; 3/6/00. Washington's supertanker
              regulations regarding general navigation watch
              procedures, crew English language skills and
              training, and maritime casualty reporting are
              pre-empted by a comprehensive federal regulatory
              scheme; the case is remanded so the validity of
              other state regulations may be assessed in light
              of the considerable federal interest at stake. 
              Syllabus.
              98-1701 98-1706 Locke U.S.

R035O.txt.htm     03/10/00     62029 bytes  (2 hits)
              R035-O; 3/6/00. Washington's supertanker
              regulations regarding general navigation watch
              procedures, crew English language skills and
              training, and maritime casualty reporting are
              pre-empted by a comprehensive federal regulatory
              scheme; the case is remanded so the validity of
              other state regulations may be assessed in light
              of the considerable federal interest at stake. 
              Kennedy, J., opinion.
              98-1701 98-1706 Locke U.S.

R009.txt.htm      03/08/00      3785 bytes  (2 hits)
              R009; 11/30/99.  This Court certifies to the
              Pennsylvania Supreme Court the question whether
              the interpretation of Pa. Stat. Ann., Tit. 35,
              sec. 6018.401(a), in Scarpone v. Commonwealth,
              535 Pa. 273, 279, 634 A. 2d 1109, 1112, was the
              correct interpretation of Pennsylvania law at the
              date Fiore's conviction under that provision
              became final.  Syllabus.
              98-942 Syllabus Fiore White Breyer,J.
              Certified-question Pennsylvania Habeas-corpus

R009O.txt.htm     03/08/00     18319 bytes  (1 hits)
              R009-O; 11/30/99.  This Court certifies to the
              Pennsylvania Supreme Court the question whether
              the interpretation of Pa. Stat. Ann., Tit. 35,
              sec. 6018.401(a), in Scarpone v. Commonwealth,
              535 Pa. 273, 279, 634 A. 2d 1109, 1112, was the
              correct interpretation of Pennsylvania law at the
              date Fiore's conviction under that provision
              became final.  Breyer, J., opinion.
              98-942 Opinion Fiore White Breyer,J.
              Certified-question Pennsylvania Habeas-corpus

R012.txt.htm      03/08/00     12536 bytes  (4 hits)
              R012; 1/11/00.  Although the Age Discrimination
              in Employment Act of 1967 contains a clear
              statement of Congress' intent to abrogate the
              States' Eleventh Amendment immunity, that
              abrogation exceeded Congress' authority under
              sec. 5 of the Fourteenth Amendment.  Syllabus. 
              98-791 O'Connor,J. Kimel Florida-Bd.-of-Regents
              ADEA Eleventh-Amdt. Sovereign-immunity

R012A.txt.htm     03/08/00     17939 bytes  (1 hits)
              R012A; 1/11/00.  Although the Age Discrimination
              in Employment Act of 1967 contains a clear
              statement of Congress' intent to abrogate the
              States' Eleventh Amendment immunity, that
              abrogation exceeded Congress' authority under
              sec. 5 of the Fourteenth Amendment.  Stevens, J.,
              dissenting in part and concurring in part.
              98-791 O'Connor,J. Kimel Florida-Bd.-of-Regents
              ADEA Eleventh-Amdt. Sovereign-immunity

R012B.txt.htm     03/08/00     28649 bytes  (1 hits)
              R012B; 1/11/00.  Although the Age Discrimination
              in Employment Act of 1967 contains a clear
              statement of Congress' intent to abrogate the
              States' Eleventh Amendment immunity, that
              abrogation exceeded Congress' authority under
              sec. 5 of the Fourteenth Amendment.  Thomas, J.,
              concurring in part and dissenting in part.
              98-791 O'Connor,J. Kimel Florida-Bd.-of-Regents
              ADEA Eleventh-Amdt. Sovereign-immunity

R012O.txt.htm     03/08/00     68542 bytes  (1 hits)
              R012-O; 1/11/00.  Although the Age Discrimination
              in Employment Act of 1967 contains a clear
              statement of Congress' intent to abrogate the
              States' Eleventh Amendment immunity, that
              abrogation exceeded Congress' authority under
              sec. 5 of the Fourteenth Amendment.  O'Connor,
              J., opinion.
              98-791 O'Connor,J. Kimel Florida-Bd.-of-Regents
              ADEA Eleventh-Amdt. Sovereign-immunity

R017.txt.htm      03/08/00     17236 bytes  (3 hits)
              R017; 1/12/00.  The Fourth Circuit erred in
              concluding that a citizen suitor's Clean Water
              Act civil penalties claim must be dismissed as
              moot when the defendant, after commencement of
              the suit, has come into compliance with its
              National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System
              permit.  Syllabus.
              98-822 Friends-of-Earth-Inc. Laidlaw-Environmenta
              l 33USC1365 Clean-Water-Act Ginsburg,J. Mootness

R017A.txt.htm     03/08/00      5402 bytes  (0 hits)
              R017A; 1/12/00.  The Fourth Circuit erred in
              concluding that a citizen suitor's Clean Water
              Act civil penalties claim must be dismissed as
              moot when the defendant, after commencement of
              the suit, has come into compliance with its
              National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System
              permit.  Stevens, J., concurring.
              98-822 Friends-of-Earth-Inc. Laidlaw-Environmenta
              l 33USC1365 Clean-Water-Act Ginsburg,J. Mootness

R017B.txt.htm     03/08/00      1689 bytes  (1 hits)
              R017B; 1/12/00.  The Fourth Circuit erred in
              concluding that a citizen suitor's Clean Water
              Act civil penalties claim must be dismissed as
              moot when the defendant, after commencement of
              the suit, has come into compliance with its
              National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System
              permit.  Kennedy, J., concurring.
              98-822 Friends-of-Earth-Inc. Laidlaw-Environmenta
              l 33USC1365 Clean-Water-Act Kennedy,J. Mootness

R017C.txt.htm     03/08/00     45252 bytes  (0 hits)
              R017C; 1/12/00.  The Fourth Circuit erred in
              concluding that a citizen suitor's Clean Water
              Act civil penalties claim must be dismissed as
              moot when the defendant, after commencement of
              the suit, has come into compliance with its
              National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System
              permit.  Scalia, J., dissenting.
              98-822 Friends-of-Earth-Inc. Laidlaw-Environmenta
              l 33USC1365 Clean-Water-Act Scalia,J. Mootness

R017O.txt.htm     03/08/00     56964 bytes  (1 hits)
              R017-O; 1/12/00.  The Fourth Circuit erred in
              concluding that a citizen suitor's Clean Water
              Act civil penalties claim must be dismissed as
              moot when the defendant, after commencement of
              the suit, has come into compliance with its
              National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System
              permit.  Ginsburg, J., opinion.
              98-822 Friends-of-Earth-Inc. Laidlaw-Environmenta
              l 33USC1365 Clean-Water-Act Mootness

R018.txt.htm      03/08/00     18147 bytes  (0 hits)
              R018; 1/12/00.  The Tenth Circuit erred in
              concluding that petitioner's suit challenging the
              U. S. Department of Transportation's procedure
              for certifying contractors as disadvantaged
              business enterprises should be dismissed as moot
              after petitioner was so certified by Colorado's
              Department of Transportation.  Per Curiam.
              99-295 PerCuriam Adarand-Constructors Slater
              Mootness Burden-of-proof Govt.-contractor
              Dept.-of-Transp.

R008.txt.htm      03/02/00      9671 bytes  (3 hits)
              R008; 11/29/99.  Insofar as the Fifth Circuit
              held that petitioners were not entitled to
              summary judgment on respondent's 42 U. S. C. sec.
              1983 claim for damages relating to a state
              university's rejection of his admission
              application, even if he would have been denied
              admission under a race-neutral policy, its
              decision contradicts Mt. Healthy City Bd. of Ed.
              v. Doyle, 429 U. S. 274.  Per Curiam.
              PerCuriam 42USC1983 Race-discrim. Texas Lesage
              College-admissions Civil-rights Summary-judgment

R010.txt.htm      03/02/00      5101 bytes  (0 hits)
              R010; 12/7/99.  Respondent publishing company is
              not entitled to prevail on a First Amendment
              "facial attack" on Cal. Govt. Code sec.
              6254(f)(3), which restricts public access to
              arrestee addresses in the possession of state and
              local law enforcement agencies.  Syllabus.
              98-678

R010A.txt.htm     03/02/00      3152 bytes  (0 hits)
              R010A; 12/7/99.  Respondent publishing company is
              not entitled to prevail on a First Amendment
              "facial attack" on Cal. Govt. Code sec.
              6254(f)(3), which restricts public access to
              arrestee addresses in the possession of state and
              local law enforcement agencies.  Scalia, J.,
              concurring.
              Los-Angeles-Police-Dept. United-Reporting-Pub.
              Scalia,J. California First-Admt. Free-Speech
              Concur

R010C.txt.htm     03/02/00     12641 bytes  (0 hits)
              R010C; 12/7/99.  Respondent publishing company is
              not entitled to prevail on a First Amendment
              "facial attack" on Cal. Govt. Code sec.
              6254(f)(3), which restricts public access to
              arrestee addresses in the possession of state and
              local law enforcement agencies.  Stevens, J.,
              concurring.
              Los-Angeles-Police-Dept. United-Reporting-Pub.
              Stevens,J. California First-Admt. Free-Speech
              Dissent

R010O.txt.htm     03/02/00     19706 bytes  (3 hits)
              R010O; 12/7/99.  Respondent publishing company is
              not entitled to prevail on a First Amendment
              "facial attack" on Cal. Govt. Code sec.
              6254(f)(3), which restricts public access to
              arrestee addresses in the possession of state and
              local law enforcement agencies.  Opinion
              Los-Angeles-Police-Dept. United-Reporting-Pub.
              Stevens,J. California First-Admt. Free-Speech
              Opinion

R011.txt.htm      03/02/00     10050 bytes  (2 hits)
              R011; 12/7/99. Petitioner's interest as heir to
              his mother's estate constituted "property" or a
              "righ[t] to property" to which federal tax liens
              attached under 26 U. S. C. sec. 6321, despite
              petitioner's exercise of the prerogative state
              law accorded him to disclaim the interest
              retroactively.  Syllabus.
              98-1101 Drye United-States 26USC6321
              Federal-taxes Disclaimer

R011O.txt.htm     03/02/00     27137 bytes  (0 hits)
              R011-O; 12/7/99. Petitioner's interest as heir to
              his mother's estate constituted "property" or a
              "righ[t] to property" to which federal tax liens
              attached under 26 U. S. C. sec. 6321, despite
              petitioner's exercise of the prerogative state
              law accorded him to disclaim the interest
              retroactively.  Ginsburg, J., opinion.
              98-1101 Drye United-States 26USC6321
              Federal-taxes Disclaimer

R014.txt.htm      03/02/00      5650 bytes  (3 hits)
              R014; 1/12/00.  Police officers did not violate
              the Fourth Amendment when they stopped and
              searched respondent, who fled an area known for
              heavy narcotics trafficking upon seeing a police
              caravan.  Syllabus.
              98-1036 Illinois Wardlow Rehnquist,C.J.
              Stop-and-frisk Fourth-Amdt. Terry-stop

R014A.txt.htm     03/02/00     39109 bytes  (3 hits)
              R014A; 1/12/00.  Police officers did not violate
              the Fourth Amendment when they stopped and
              searched respondent, who fled an area known for
              heavy narcotics trafficking upon seeing a police
              caravan.  Stevens, J., concurring in part and
              dissenting in part.
              98-1036 Illinois Wardlow Stop-and-frisk
              Fourth-Amdt. Terry-stop

R014O.txt.htm     03/02/00     13472 bytes  (2 hits)
              R014-O; 1/12/00.  Police officers did not violate
              the Fourth Amendment when they stopped and
              searched respondent, who fled an area known for
              heavy narcotics trafficking upon seeing a police
              caravan.  Rehnquist, C. J., opinion.
              98-1036 Illinois Wardlow Stop-and-frisk
              Fourth-Amdt. Terry-stop

R016.txt.htm      03/02/00      6501 bytes  (0 hits)
              R016; 1/12/00.  Neither the holding nor the
              reasoning of Faretta v. California, 422 U. S.
              806, requires a State to recognize a
              constitutional right to self-representation on
              direct appeal from a criminal conviction. 
              Syllabus.

R016A.txt.htm     03/02/00      1337 bytes  (0 hits)
              R016A; 1/12/00.  Neither the holding nor the
              reasoning of Faretta v. California, 422 U. S.
              806, requires a State to recognize a
              constitutional right to self-representation on
              direct appeal from a criminal conviction. 
              Kennedy, J., concurring.
              98-7809 Concur Martinez Court-of-Appeal-of-Cal.
              Kennedy,J. Faretta Appeals Self-representation

R016B.txt.htm     03/02/00      1966 bytes  (2 hits)
              R016B; 1/12/00.  Neither the holding nor the
              reasoning of Faretta v. California, 422 U. S.
              806, requires a State to recognize a
              constitutional right to self-representation on
              direct appeal from a criminal conviction. 
              Breyer, J., concurring.
              98-7809 Concur Martinez Court-of-Appeal-of-Cal.
              Breyer,J. Faretta Appeals Self-representation

R016C.txt.htm     03/02/00      3499 bytes  (0 hits)
              R016C; 1/12/00.  Neither the holding nor the
              reasoning of Faretta v. California, 422 U. S.
              806, requires a State to recognize a
              constitutional right to self-representation on
              direct appeal from a criminal conviction. 
              Scalia, J., concurring in the judgment.
              98-7809 Concur Martinez Court-of-Appeal-of-Cal.
              Scalia,J. Faretta Appeals Self-representation

R016O.txt.htm     03/02/00     28923 bytes  (0 hits)
              R016-O; 1/12/00.  Neither the holding nor the
              reasoning of Faretta v. California, 422 U. S.
              806, requires a State to recognize a
              constitutional right to self-representation on
              direct appeal from a criminal conviction. 
              Stevens, J., opinion.
              98-7809 Opinion Martinez Court-of-Appeal-of-Cal.
              Stevens,J. Faretta Appeals Self-representation

R023.txt.htm      03/02/00      9179 bytes  (0 hits)
              R023; 1/24/00. In light of the language of  sec.
              5 of the Voting Rights Act of 1965 and the
              Court's holding in Beer v. United States, 425 U.
              S. 130, sec. 5 does not prohibit preclearance of
              a redistricting plan enacted with a
              discriminatory but nonretrogressive purpose. 
              Syllabus. 
              98-405 Reno Bossier-Parish-School-Bd. Price
              Redistricting Voting-rights

R023A.txt.htm     03/02/00      1849 bytes  (0 hits)
              R023A; 1/24/00. In light of the language of  sec.
              5 of the Voting Rights Act of 1965 and the
              Court's holding in Beer v. United States, 425 U.
              S. 130, sec. 5 does not prohibit preclearance of
              a redistricting plan enacted with a
              discriminatory but nonretrogressive purpose. 
              Thomas, J., concurring. 
              98-405 Reno Bossier-Parish-School-Bd. Price
              Redistricting Voting-rights

R023C.txt.htm     03/02/00      3857 bytes  (1 hits)
              R023C; 1/24/00. In light of the language of  sec.
              5 of the Voting Rights Act of 1965 and the
              Court's holding in Beer v. United States, 425 U.
              S. 130, sec. 5 does not prohibit preclearance of
              a redistricting plan enacted with a
              discriminatory but nonretrogressive purpose. 
              Stevens, J., dissenting.
              98-405 Reno Bossier-Parish-School-Bd. Price
              Redistricting Voting-rights

R023D.txt.htm     03/02/00      7678 bytes  (0 hits)
              R023D; 1/24/00. In light of the language of  sec.
              5 of the Voting Rights Act of 1965 and the
              Court's holding in Beer v. United States, 425 U.
              S. 130, sec. 5 does not prohibit preclearance of
              a redistricting plan enacted with a
              discriminatory but nonretrogressive purpose. 
              Breyer, J., dissenting.
              98-405 Reno Bossier-Parish-School-Bd. Price
              Redistricting Voting-rights

R024.txt.htm      03/02/00     12814 bytes  (1 hits)
              R024; 1/24/00.  Buckley v. Valeo, 424 U. S. 1
              (per curiam) is authority for state limits on
              contributions to state political candidates, and
              those limits need not be pegged to the federal
              limits approved in Buckley.  Syllabus.
              98-963 Nixon Shrink-Mo.-Govt.-PAC Elections
              Buckley First-Amdt.

R024A.txt.htm     03/02/00      4586 bytes  (0 hits)
              R024A; 1/24/00.  Buckley v. Valeo, 424 U. S. 1
              (per curiam) is authority for state limits on
              contributions to state political candidates, and
              those limits need not be pegged to the federal
              limits approved in Buckley.  Stevens, J.,
              concurring.
              98-963 Nixon Shrink-Mo.-Govt.-PAC Elections
              Buckley First-Amdt.

R024B.txt.htm     03/02/00     15313 bytes  (0 hits)
              R024B; 1/24/00.  Buckley v. Valeo, 424 U. S. 1
              (per curiam) is authority for state limits on
              contributions to state political candidates, and
              those limits need not be pegged to the federal
              limits approved in Buckley.  Breyer, J.,
              concurring.
              98-963 Nixon Shrink-Mo.-Govt.-PAC Elections
              Buckley First-Amdt.

R024C.txt.htm     03/02/00     11650 bytes  (1 hits)
              R024C; 1/24/00.  Buckley v. Valeo, 424 U. S. 1
              (per curiam) is authority for state limits on
              contributions to state political candidates, and
              those limits need not be pegged to the federal
              limits approved in Buckley.  Kennedy, J.,
              dissenting.
              98-963 Nixon Shrink-Mo.-Govt.-PAC Elections
              Buckley First-Amdt.

R024D.txt.htm     03/02/00     55731 bytes  (0 hits)
              R024D; 1/24/00.  Buckley v. Valeo, 424 U. S. 1
              (per curiam) is authority for state limits on
              contributions to state political candidates, and
              those limits need not be pegged to the federal
              limits approved in Buckley.  Thomas, J.,
              dissenting.
              98-963 Nixon Shrink-Mo.-Govt.-PAC Elections
              Buckley First-Amdt.

R024O.txt.htm     03/02/00     42879 bytes  (0 hits)
              R024-O; 1/24/00.  Buckley v. Valeo, 424 U. S. 1
              (per curiam) is authority for state limits on
              contributions to state political candidates, and
              those limits need not be pegged to the federal
              limits approved in Buckley.  Souter, J., opinion.
              98-963 Nixon Shrink-Mo.-Govt.-PAC Elections
              Buckley First-Amdt.

R025.txt.htm      03/02/00      4705 bytes  (1 hits)
              R025; 2/22/00. Remittances of estimated income
              tax and withholding tax are "paid" on the due
              date of a calendar year taxpayer's income tax
              return.  Syllabus
              98-1667 Baral U.S. Income-taxes 26USC6511

R025O.txt.htm     03/02/00     19461 bytes  (1 hits)
              R025-O; 2/22/00. Remittances of estimated income
              tax and withholding tax are "paid" on the due
              date of a calendar year taxpayer's income tax
              return. Opinion.
              98-1667 Baral U.S. Income-taxes 26USC6511

R026.txt.htm      03/02/00      9960 bytes  (2 hits)
              R026; 2/22/00.  Fed. Rule Civ. Proc. 50 permits
              an appellate court to direct the entry of
              judgment as a matter of law when it determines
              that evidence was erroneously admitted at trial
              and that the remaining, properly admitted,
              evidence is insufficient to constitute a
              submissible case.  Syllabus.
              99-161 Weisgram Marley-Co. Appeals F.R.Civ.P.50
              Directed-judgment

R026O.txt.htm     03/02/00     39325 bytes  (2 hits)
              R026-O; 2/22/00.  Fed. Rule Civ. Proc. 50 permits
              an appellate court to direct the entry of
              judgment as a matter of law when it determines
              that evidence was erroneously admitted at trial
              and that the remaining, properly admitted,
              evidence is insufficient to constitute a
              submissible case.  Opinion.
              99-161 Weisgram Marley-Co. Appeals F.R.Civ.P.50
              Directed-judgment

R027.txt.htm      03/02/00      6190 bytes  (0 hits)
              R027; 2/22/00.  Because California's interest
              deduction offset provision is not a reasonable
              allocation of expense deductions to the income
              that the expense generates, it constitutes
              impermissible taxation of income outside the
              State's jurisdictional reach in violation of the
              Federal Constitution's Due Process and Commerce
              Clauses.  Syllabus.
              98-2043 Hunt-Wesson-Inc Commerce-Clause
              State-taxes Due-Process-Clause

R027O.txt.htm     03/02/00     22199 bytes  (1 hits)
              R027-O; 2/22/00.  Because California's interest
              deduction offset provision is not a reasonable
              allocation of expense deductions to the income
              that the expense generates, it constitutes
              impermissible taxation of income outside the
              State's jurisdictional reach in violation of the
              Federal Constitution's Due Process and Commerce
              Clauses.  Opinion.
              98-2043 Hunt-Wesson-Inc Commerce-Clause
              State-taxes Due-Process-Clause

R028.txt.htm      03/02/00      9973 bytes  (0 hits)
              R028; 2/23/00. Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.
              S. 668, provides the proper framework for
              evaluating a claim that counsel was
              constitutionally ineffective for failing to file
              a notice of appeal: counsel's representation must
              fall below an objective standard of
              reasonableness and must have prejudiced the
              defendant.  Syllabus.
              98-1441 Roe Flores-Ortega Right-to-counsel
              Notice-of-appeal Sixth-Amdt.

R028A.txt.htm     03/02/00      1379 bytes  (0 hits)
              R028A; 2/23/00. Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.
              S. 668, provides the proper framework for
              evaluating a claim that counsel was
              constitutionally ineffective for failing to file
              a notice of appeal: counsel's representation must
              fall below an objective standard of
              reasonableness and must have prejudiced the
              defendant.  Breyer, J., concurring.
              98-1441 Roe Flores-Ortega Right-to-counsel
              Notice-of-appeal Sixth-Amdt.

R028B.txt.htm     03/02/00     14486 bytes  (0 hits)
              R028B; 2/23/00. Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.
              S. 668, provides the proper framework for
              evaluating a claim that counsel was
              constitutionally ineffective for failing to file
              a notice of appeal: counsel's representation must
              fall below an objective standard of
              reasonableness and must have prejudiced the
              defendant.  Souter, J., concurring in part and
              dissenting in part.
              98-1441 Roe Flores-Ortega Right-to-counsel
              Notice-of-appeal Sixth-Amdt.

R028C.txt.htm     03/02/00      1470 bytes  (2 hits)
              R028C; 2/23/00. Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.
              S. 668, provides the proper framework for
              evaluating a claim that counsel was
              constitutionally ineffective for failing to file
              a notice of appeal: counsel's representation must
              fall below an objective standard of
              reasonableness and must have prejudiced the
              defendant.  Ginsburg, J., concurring in part and
              dissenting in part.
              98-1441 Roe Flores-Ortega Right-to-counsel
              Notice-of-appeal Sixth-Amdt.

R028O.txt.htm     03/02/00     36651 bytes  (0 hits)
              R028-O; 2/23/00. Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.
              S. 668, provides the proper framework for
              evaluating a claim that counsel was
              constitutionally ineffective for failing to file
              a notice of appeal: counsel's representation must
              fall below an objective standard of
              reasonableness and must have prejudiced the
              defendant.  O'Connor, J., opinion.
              98-1441 Roe Flores-Ortega Right-to-counsel
              Notice-of-appeal Sixth-Amdt.

R029.txt.htm      03/02/00      9757 bytes  (5 hits)
              R029; 2/23/00.  The Fifteenth Amendment
              invalidates a Hawaii electoral qualification that
              permits only "Hawaiians"-descendants of persons
              inhabiting Hawaii in 1778-to vote for trustees of
              a state agency that administers programs
              benefiting "native Hawaiians" and "Hawaiians." 
              Syllabus.
              98-818 Rice Cayetano Hawaii  Fifteenth-Amdt.
              Right-to-vote

R029A.txt.htm     03/02/00      8444 bytes  (1 hits)
              R029A; 2/23/00.  The Fifteenth Amendment
              invalidates a Hawaii electoral qualification that
              permits only "Hawaiians"-descendants of persons
              inhabiting Hawaii in 1778-to vote for trustees of
              a state agency that administers programs
              benefiting "native Hawaiians" and "Hawaiians." 
              Breyer, J., concurring in the result.
              98-818 Rice Cayetano Hawaii  Fifteenth-Amdt.
              Right-to-vote

R029B.txt.htm     03/02/00     53339 bytes  (1 hits)
              R029B; 2/23/00.  The Fifteenth Amendment
              invalidates a Hawaii electoral qualification that
              permits only "Hawaiians"-descendants of persons
              inhabiting Hawaii in 1778-to vote for trustees of
              a state agency that administers programs
              benefiting "native Hawaiians" and "Hawaiians." 
              Stevens, J., dissenting.
              98-818 Rice Cayetano Hawaii  Fifteenth-Amdt.
              Right-to-vote

R029C.txt.htm     03/02/00      2136 bytes  (1 hits)
              R029C; 2/23/00.  The Fifteenth Amendment
              invalidates a Hawaii electoral qualification that
              permits only "Hawaiians"-descendants of persons
              inhabiting Hawaii in 1778-to vote for trustees of
              a state agency that administers programs
              benefiting "native Hawaiians" and "Hawaiians." 
              Ginsburg, J., dissenting.
              98-818 Rice Cayetano Hawaii  Fifteenth-Amdt.
              Right-to-vote

R029O.txt.htm     03/02/00     59392 bytes  (1 hits)
              R029-O; 2/23/00.  The Fifteenth Amendment
              invalidates a Hawaii electoral qualification that
              permits only "Hawaiians"-descendants of persons
              inhabiting Hawaii in 1778-to vote for trustees of
              a state agency that administers programs
              benefiting "native Hawaiians" and "Hawaiians." 
              Kennedy, J., opinion.
              98-818 Rice Cayetano Hawaii  Fifteenth-Amdt.
              Right-to-vote

R030.txt.htm      03/02/00      7156 bytes  (3 hits)
              R030; 2/23/00.  The 4-year limitations period for
              a civil RICO claim is not governed by an injury
              and pattern discovery rule that starts only when
              the claimant discovers, or should discover, both
              an injury and pattern of RICO activity. 
              Syllabus.

R030O.txt.htm     03/02/00     26071 bytes  (1 hits)
              R030-O; 2/23/00.  The 4-year limitations period
              for a civil RICO claim is not governed by an
              injury and pattern discovery rule that starts
              only when the claimant discovers, or should
              discover, both an injury and pattern of RICO
              activity.  Souter, J., opinion.
              98-896 Opinion Rotella Wood RICO Limitations

R031.txt.htm      03/02/00      5806 bytes  (4 hits)
              R031; 2/23/00.  The Equal Protection Clause gives
              rise to a cause of action on behalf of a "class
              of one," where a plaintiff alleges that she has
              been intentionally treated differently from
              others similarly situated and that there is no
              rational basis for such treatment.  Per Curiam.
              98-1288 PerCuriam Willowbrook-Village Olech
              Equal-protection Fourteenth-Amdt. Class-of-one

R031A.txt.htm     03/02/00      2909 bytes  (0 hits)
              R031A; 2/23/00.  The Equal Protection Clause
              gives rise to a cause of action on behalf of a
              "class of one," where a plaintiff alleges that
              she has been intentionally treated differently
              from others similarly situated and that there is
              no rational basis for such treatment.  Breyer,
              J., concurring in the result.
              98-1288 Willowbrook-Village Olech
              Equal-protection Fourteenth-Amdt. Class-of-one

R032.txt.htm      03/02/00     12439 bytes  (0 hits)
              R032; 2/29/00.  Title 42 U. S. C. 405(h), part of
              a special system of administrative and judicial
              review for denials of Medicare claims, bars
              respondent nursing home association from invoking
              federal-question jurisdiction to challenge the
              validity of Medicare enforcement regulations. 
              Syllabus.
              98-1109 Shalala Illinois-Long-Term-Care
              Jurisdiction Medicare Nursing-homes

R032A.txt.htm     03/02/00      4053 bytes  (0 hits)
              R032A; 2/29/00.  Title 42 U. S. C. 405(h), part
              of a special system of administrative and
              judicial review for denials of Medicare claims,
              bars respondent nursing home association from
              invoking federal-question jurisdiction to
              challenge the validity of Medicare enforcement
              regulations.  Stevens, J., dissenting.
              98-1109 Shalala Illinois-Long-Term-Care
              Jurisdiction Medicare Nursing-homes

R032B.txt.htm     03/02/00      3146 bytes  (0 hits)
              R032B; 2/29/00.  Title 42 U. S. C. 405(h), part
              of a special system of administrative and
              judicial review for denials of Medicare claims,
              bars respondent nursing home association from
              invoking federal-question jurisdiction to
              challenge the validity of Medicare enforcement
              regulations.  Scalia, J., dissenting.
              98-1109 Shalala Illinois-Long-Term-Care
              Jurisdiction Medicare Nursing-homes

R032C.txt.htm     03/02/00     52820 bytes  (1 hits)
              R032C; 2/29/00.  Title 42 U. S. C. 405(h), part
              of a special system of administrative and
              judicial review for denials of Medicare claims,
              bars respondent nursing home association from
              invoking federal-question jurisdiction to
              challenge the validity of Medicare enforcement
              regulations.  Thomas, J., dissenting.
              98-1109 Shalala Illinois-Long-Term-Care
              Jurisdiction Medicare Nursing-homes

R032O.txt.htm     03/02/00     62947 bytes  (1 hits)
              R032-O; 2/29/00.  Title 42 U. S. C. 405(h), part
              of a special system of administrative and
              judicial review for denials of Medicare claims,
              bars respondent nursing home association from
              invoking federal-question jurisdiction to
              challenge the validity of Medicare enforcement
              regulations.  Breyer, J., opinion.
              98-1109 Shalala Illinois-Long-Term-Care
              Jurisdiction Medicare Nursing-homes

9995za.txt.htm    11/15/99      1918 bytes  (56 hits)
              Excel Communications, Inc., et al. v. AT&T Corp.
              On petition for Writ of Certiorari to the United
              States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit.
              No. 99-95. Decided October 12, 1999.
              The petition for writ of certiorari is denied.

R001.txt.htm      11/15/99      2992 bytes  (21 hits)
              R001; 10/12/99.  Abusive filer is denied leave to
              proceed in forma pauperis on all future
              certiorari petitions in noncriminal cases.  Per
              Curiam.
              98-9913 PerCuriam Brancato Gunn Abusive-filings
              Frivolous IFP Certiorari

R002.txt.htm      11/15/99      3655 bytes  (7 hits)
              R002; 10/12/99.  Abusive filer is denied leave to
              proceed in forma pauperis on all future
              certiorari and extraordinary writ petitions in
              noncriminal cases.  Per Curiam.
              98-9933 PerCuriam 99-5445 Antonelli Caridine IFP
              Abusive-filings U.S.

R003.txt.htm      11/15/99      3241 bytes  (8 hits)
              R003; 10/12/99.  Abusive filer is denied leave to
              proceed in forma pauperis on all future
              certiorari and extraordinary writ petitions in
              noncriminal cases.  Per Curiam.
              99-5260 PerCuriam Judd U.-S.-District-Court IFP
              Abusive-filings Frivolous Certiorari

R004.txt.htm      11/15/99      3233 bytes  (6 hits)
              R004; 10/12/99.  Abusive filer is denied leave to
              proceed in forma pauperis on all future
              certiorari and extraordinary writ petitions in
              noncriminal cases.  Per Curiam.
              99-5283 PerCuriam Dempsey Martin Abusive-filings
              IFP Frivolous Certiorari

R005.txt.htm      11/15/99      2919 bytes  (6 hits)
              R005; 10/12/99.  Abusive filer is denied leave to
              proceed in forma pauperis on all future
              certiorari petitions in noncriminal cases.  Per
              Curiam.
              99-5316 PerCuriam Prunty Brooks Abusive-filings
              IFP Frivolous Certiorari

R006.txt.htm      11/15/99      8060 bytes  (42 hits)
              R006; 10/18/99.  The trial court's ruling that
              police were entitled to make a warrantless search
              of a homicide crime scene and the objects found
              there conflicts with the rule that there is no
              "murder scene exception" to the Fourth
              Amendment's Warrant Clause.  Per Curiam.
              98-8770 PerCuriam Flippo West-Virginia
              Criminal-law Murder Fourth-Amdt. Search-warrant

R007.txt.htm      11/15/99      3197 bytes  (18 hits)
              R007; 10/18/99.  Abusive filer is denied leave to
              proceed in forma pauperis on all future
              certiorari and extraordinary writ petitions in
              noncriminal cases.  Per Curiam.
              99-5440 PerCuriam Bauer Abusive-filings Frivolous
              Certiorari

R010B.txt.htm     03/02/00      4564 bytes  (0 hits)
              R010B; 12/7/99.  Respondent publishing company is
              not entitled to prevail on a First Amendment
              "facial attack" on Cal. Govt. Code sec.
              6254(f)(3), which restricts public access to
              arrestee addresses in the possession of state and
              local law enforcement agencies.  Ginsburg, J.,
              concurring.
              Los-Angeles-Police-Dept. United-Reporting-Pub.
              Ginsburg,J. California First-Admt. Free-Speech
              Concur

R013.txt.htm      03/02/00      4412 bytes  (0 hits)
              R013; 1/11/00. Defense counsel's agreement to a
              trial date outside the time period set by the
              Interstate Agreement on Detainers bars the
              defendant from seeking dismissal because trial
              did not occur within that period.  Syllabus.
              98-1299 New-York Hill Scalia,J. IAD Limitations
              Detainer

R013O.txt.htm     03/02/00     19714 bytes  (0 hits)
              R013-O; 1/11/00. Defense counsel's agreement to a
              trial date outside the time period set by the
              Interstate Agreement on Detainers bars the
              defendant from seeking dismissal because trial
              did not occur within that period.  Scalia, J.,
              opinion.
              98-1299 Opinion New-York Hill Scalia,J. IAD
              Limitations Detainer 

R015.txt.htm      03/02/00      5917 bytes  (0 hits)
              R015; 1/12/00.  In enacting the Driver's Privacy
              Protection Act of 1994, which restricts the
              dissemination and sale of information contained
              in state motor vehicle records, Congress did not
              run afoul of the federalism principles enunciated
              in New York v. United States, 505 U. S. 144, and
              Printz v. United States, 521 U. S. 898. 
              Syllabus.
              98-1464 Syllabus Reno Condon 18USC2721-2725
              Rehnquist,C.J. Federalism DPPA

R015O.txt.htm     03/02/00     21356 bytes  (1 hits)
              R015-O; 1/12/00.  In enacting the Driver's
              Privacy Protection Act of 1994, which restricts
              the dissemination and sale of information
              contained in state motor vehicle records,
              Congress did not run afoul of the federalism
              principles enunciated in New York v. United
              States, 505 U. S. 144, and Printz v. United
              States, 521 U. S. 898.  Rehnquist, C. J., opinion
              98-1464 Reno Condon
              18USC2721-2725 Rehnquist,C.J. Federalism DPPA

R023B.txt.htm     03/02/00     78583 bytes  (1 hits)
              R023B; 1/24/00. In light of the language of  sec.
              5 of the Voting Rights Act of 1965 and the
              Court's holding in Beer v. United States, 425 U.
              S. 130, sec. 5 does not prohibit preclearance of
              a redistricting plan enacted with a
              discriminatory but nonretrogressive purpose. 
              Souter, J., concurring in part and dissenting in
              part.
              98-405 Reno Bossier-Parish-School-Bd. Price
              Redistricting Voting-rights

R023O.txt.htm     03/02/00     48672 bytes  (2 hits)
              R023O; 1/24/00. In light of the language of  sec.
              5 of the Voting Rights Act of 1965 and the
              Court's holding in Beer v. United States, 425 U.
              S. 130, sec. 5 does not prohibit preclearance of
              a redistricting plan enacted with a
              discriminatory but nonretrogressive purpose. 
              Opinion
              98-405 Reno Bossier-Parish-School-Bd. Price
              Redistricting Voting-rights


Document ID: us-scotus-2000.htm


Modified --> $Date: 2000/08/22 04:51:06 $

www.lawrepository.com Support