skip navigation
search

Search the opinions of the US Supreme Court

Search for:
All decisions
Only decisions since 1991
Only summaries of decisions
Only historic decisions
use and, or, not -- and is default
* acts as wildcard, phrases in "double quotes"

Your query trials returned 40 results.

1000 GASPERINI V. CENTER FOR HUMANITIES, INC., 517 U.S. 1102 (1996).
[Syllabus]
789 SMITH V. SPISAK
[Syllabus]
789 SNYDER V. LOUISIANA
[Syllabus]
789 OREGON V. ICE
[Syllabus]
789 PENNSYLVANIA BD. OF PROBATION AND PAROLE V. SCOTT, 524 U.S. 357 (1998)
[Syllabus]
789 SNYDER V. LOUISIANA
[Syllabus]
789 WHORTON V. BOCKTING
[Syllabus]
789 VAN V. GOLDSTEIN
[Syllabus]
499 O'NEAL V. MCANINCH, 513 U.S. 432 (1995).
[Syllabus]
499
[Syllabus]
499 CRAWFORD V. WASHINGTON
[Syllabus]
499 RUTLEDGE V. UNITED STATES., 517 U.S. 292 (1996).
[Syllabus]
499
[Syllabus]
499
[Syllabus]
499
[Syllabus]
499 HALBERT V. MICHIGAN
[Syllabus]
499 UNITED STATES V. TINKLENBERG
[Syllabus]
499 SHEPARD V. UNITED STATES
[Syllabus]
499
[Syllabus]
499 EXXON SHIPPING CO. V. BAKER
[Syllabus]
499 BUFORD V. UNITED STATES
[Syllabus]
Deferential review is appropriate when an appeals court reviews a trial court's Sentencing Guideline determination as to whether an offender's prior convictions were consolidated for sentencing purposes.
499
[Syllabus]
499
[Syllabus]
499
[Syllabus]
499 UNITED STATES V. MARCUS
[Syllabus]
499 KNOWLES V. MIRZAYANCE
[Syllabus]
499 M. L. B. V. S. L. J., 519 U.S. 102 (1996).
[Syllabus]
499
[Syllabus]
499 MERCK KGAA V. INTEGRA LIFESCIENCES I, LTD.
[Syllabus]
499 SKILLING V. UNITED STATES
[Syllabus]
499 WOOD V. ALLEN
[Syllabus]
499 KANSAS V. HENDRICKS, 117 S.CT. 2072, 138 L.ED.2D 501 (1997).
[Syllabus]
499 MARTINEZ V. COURT OF APPEAL OF CAL.,FOURTH APPELLATE DIST.
[Syllabus]
Does a criminal defendant have a constitutional right to elect self-representation on direct appeal from a judgment of conviction?
499 UNITED STATES V. MARTINEZ-SALAZAR
[Syllabus]
Whether a defendant is entitled to automatic reversal of his conviction when he uses a peremptory challenge to remove a potential juror whom the district court erroneously failed to remove for cause, and he ultimately exhausts his remaining peremptory challenges.
499 BOARD OF TRUSTEES OF LELAND STANFORD JUNIORUNIV. V.ROCHE MOLECULAR SYSTEMS, INC.
[Syllabus]
499 HARRINGTON V. RICHTER
[Syllabus]
499 HAMDAN V. RUMSFELD
[Syllabus]
499 FLORIDA V. THOMAS
[Syllabus]
Because the judgment below was not "[f]inal" within the meaning of 28 U. S. C. ยง1257(a), this Court lacks jurisdiction to decide the question on which certiorari was granted.
499 BRACY V. GRAMLEY, WARDEN, 520 U.S. 899 (1997).
[Syllabus]
499
[Syllabus]