Addington v. Texas (1979) New burden of proof for involuntary commitment.
Aguilar v. Texas (1964) Hearsay is not enough for a warrant.
Alabama v. White (1990) Corroborated anonymous tip may support a stop.
Allen v. United States (1896) Approved the use of jury instructions to avoid a hung jury.
Alleyne v. United States (2013) All facts that increase a mandatory minimum sentence must be submitted to and found true by a jury.
Argersinger v. Hamlin (1972) The accused cannot be subjected to actual imprisonment unless provided with counsel.
Arizona v. Evans (1995) The computer says you have a warrant. You deny it. Now what?
Arizona v. Fulminante (1991) To what extent can police use psychological pressure?
Arizona v. Gant (2009) What are the limits to a vehicle search incident to arrest?
Arizona v. Hicks (1987) Police suspect a stereo is stolen. What can they do?
Arkansas v. Sullivan (2001) Subjective intentions play no role in ordinary, probable-cause Fourth Amendment analysis. The proposition that a traffic-violation arrest will not be rendered invalid by the fact that it was a mere pretext for a narcotics search.
Ashcroft v. Free Speech Coalition (2002) Struck down portions of the federal Child Pornography Prevention Act (CPPA).
Atwater v. Lago Vista (2001) Can you be arrested for not wearing a seat belt?
Banks v. Dretke (2004) Denied a fair trial as prosecutors did not disclose key information to the defense
Barnes v. United States (1973) Finding no lack of "rational connection" between unexplained possession of recently stolen property and knowledge that the property was stolen comports with due process.
Bell v. Wolfish (1979) In order to evaluate whether conditions of pre-trial confinement violate an inmate's guarantee of due process, a court must determine whether those conditions amount to punishment of the detainee.
Benson v. United States (1892)
Benton v. Maryland (1969) Defendant gambled on a new trial and lost - now what?
Berghuis v. Thompkins (2010) Unless and until suspects actually state that they are relying on their right(s), subsequent voluntary statements may be used in court and police may continue to interact with (or question) them.
Birchfield v. North Dakota (2016) The search incident to arrest doctrine permits law enforcement to conduct warrantless breath tests but not blood tests on suspected drunk drivers.
Bivens v. Six Unknown Named Agents of Federal Bureau of Narcotics (1971) Can an unlawful search or seizure support a federal lawsuit?
Blau v. United States (1950) It is a violation of the Fifth Amendment to compel a witness who objects on the ground of self-incrimination to testify before a grand jury in response to questions concerning his employment.
Board of Education v. Earls (2002) It does not violate the Fourth Amendment for public schools to conduct mandatory drug testing on students participating in extracurricular activities.
Bordenkircher v. Hayes (1978) The prosecutor has a legitimate interest in persuading a defendant to relinquish his or her right to plead not guilty
Boyd v. United States (1886)
Brady v. Maryland (1963) What are prosecutors' duties to reveal potentially exculpatory evidence?
Bram v. United States (1897) A confession is admissible only if the product of an uncoerced exercise of a suspect's free will.
Branzburg v. Hayes (1972) Invalidating the use of the First Amendment as a defense for reporters summoned to testify before a grand jury.
Breithaupt v. Abram (1957) Involuntary blood samples, taken by a skilled technician to determine intoxication, do not violate substantive due process.
Brendlin v. California (2007) All occupants of a car are "seized" for purposes of the Fourth Amendment during a traffic stop, not just the driver.
Brooks v. Tennessee (1972) A defendant may not be penalized for remaining silent at the close of the State's case by being excluded from the stand later in the trial.
Brown v. Illinois (1975) Protection against the introduction of evidence obtained in an illegal arrest is not attenuated by reading the defendant Miranda Rights.
Bullcoming v. New Mexico (2011) A criminal defendant has the right to be confronted with the witnesses against him, and "surrogate testimony" is not good enough.
Byrd v. United States (2018) Drivers of rental cars have rights protecting them from unconstitutional searches by police.
Cage v. Louisiana (1990) A jury instruction is unconstitutional if there is a reasonable likelihood that the jury understood the instruction to allow conviction without proof beyond a reasonable doubt.
California v. Acevedo (1991) Interpreted the Carroll doctrine to provide one rule to govern all automobile searches.
California v. Ciraolo (1986) Aerial observation of a person's backyard by police, even if done without a search warrant, does not violate the Fourth Amendment.
California v. Greenwood (1988) Can police search trash at the curb without a warrant or probable cause?
Carella v. California (1989)
Carpenter v. United States (2017) Concerns the privacy of historical cell site location information.
Carroll v. United States (1925) The automobile exception
Chambers v. Maroney (1970)
Chapman v. California (1967) A federal "harmless error" rule must apply, instead of equivalent state rules, for reviewing trials where federally-protected rights had been violated.
Cheek v. United States (1991) A good-faith misunderstanding of the law or a good-faith belief that one is not violating the law negates willfulness, whether or not the claimed belief or misunderstanding is objectively reasonable.
Chimel v. California (1969) How broad is a search incident to arrest?
City of Indianapolis v. Edmond (2000) Police may not conduct vehicle searches, specifically ones involving drug-sniffing police dogs, at a checkpoint or roadblock without reasonable suspicion.
City of Ontario v. Quon (2010) The extent to which the right to privacy applies to electronic communications in a government workplace.
Clark v. Arizona (2006) Due process permits a state to prevent a criminal defendant from providing evidence of diminished capacity.
Collins v. Virginia (2018) The automobile exemption does not include the home or curtilage and that vehicles that are stored within the home's curtilage cannot be searched without a warrant.
Colorado v. Bertine (1987) The Fourth Amendment does not prohibit the State from proving charges with the evidence discovered during an inventory search.
Colorado v. Connelly (1986) Requires a court to suppress a confession when the defendant's mental state, at the time he confessed, interfered with his "rational intellect" and his "free will".
Coolidge v. New Hampshire (1971) Restricted the scope of warrantless search and seizure by limiting the use of the automobile, and plain view exceptions to the warrant requirement of the fourth amendment.
Corley v. United States (2009) Requires that a confession taken more than six hours after arrest and before presentment be suppressed if there was unreasonable or unnecessary delay in bringing the defendant before the magistrate judge.
Counselman v. Hitchcock (1892) Not incriminating an individual for testimony was not the same as not requiring them to testify at all.
County of Riverside v. McLaughlin (1991) Any suspects that are arrested without a warrant by law enforcement have to know why they are being arrested from a judge within 48 hours.
Crawford v. Washington (2004) Evidence will not be used at trial unless the witness is present so reliability can be tested by cross-examination.
Crist v. Bretz (1987) Jeopardy attaches in a jury trial when the jury is empaneled and sworn.
Daubert v. Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals, Inc. (1993) A new standard for expert testimony sets the judge as gatekeeper.
Davis v. United States (2011) Assertion of the right to counsel must be "unambiguous or unequivocal request for counsel"
Davis v. Washington (2006) Sixth Amendment Confrontation Clause does not apply to "non-testimonial" statements.
Dickerson v. United States (2000) Elevated the warning requirements of Miranda to constitutional proportions.
Dick v. New York Life Ins. Co. (1959) Proof of insurance coverage and death by gunshot wound shifted the burden to the insurer to prove that the death was not accidental.
District Attorney’s Office v. Osborne (2009) The Constitution's due process clause does not require states to turn over DNA evidence to a party seeking a civil suit.
District of Columbia v. Armes (1882) Protects an individual right to possess firearms and that the city's total ban on handguns, as well as its requirement that firearms in the home be kept nonfunctional even when necessary for self-defense, violated that right.
Dixon v. United States (2006) The government meets its evidentiary burden when it proves beyond a reasonable doubt that the defendant acted "knowingly" and "willfully”, concerning a duress plea.
Donnelly v. United States (1913) Hearsay evidence relating to the confession of a third party.
Doyle v. Ohio (1976) Post-arrest silence is insolubly ambiguous because of what the State is required to advise the person arrested.
Duckworth v. Eagan (1989) Informing a suspect that an attorney would be appointed for him "if and when you go to court" does not render Miranda warnings inadequate.
Duncan v. Louisiana (1968) Sixth Amendment right to jury trial applies to crimes carrying more than six months imprisonment.
Edwards v. Arizona (1981) Once a defendant invokes the Fifth Amendment right to counsel, police must cease custodial interrogation.
Elkins v. United States (1960) The "silver platter doctrine", which allowed federal prosecutors to use evidence illegally gathered by state police, is unconstitutional.
Escobedo v. Illinois (1964) One in the custody of law enforcement has a Sixth Amendment right to speak to an attorney.
Fernandez v. California (2014) The objecting co-resident is removed for objectively reasonable purposes (such as lawful arrest), the remaining resident may validly consent to search.
Florida v. Jardines (2013) Police use of a trained detection dog to sniff for narcotics on the front porch of a private home is a search, which requires probable cause and a search warrant.
Florida v. Jimeno (1991) A criminal suspect's right to be free from unreasonable searches is not violated when, after he gives police permission to search his car, they open a closed container found within the car that might reasonably hold the object of the search.
Florida v. Powell (2010) Criminal suspects have a right to have their lawyer present during police questioning.
Florida v. Wells (1990) There must be a policy in place that determines whether inventory searches include opening closed containers or not.
Foster v. California (1969)
Francis v. Franklin (1985) The acts of a person of sound mind and discretion are presumed to be the product of the person's will, but the presumption may be rebutted.
Funk v. United States (1933) The federal courts are not bound by the rules of the common law as they existed at a specified time in the respective states.
Gardner v. Barney, 73 U.S. (6 Wall.) 499 (1868)
Georgia v. Randolph (2006) A search conducted without a warrant is unconstitutional if one occupant consents but another occupant of the same residence does not.
Gerstein v. Pugh (1975) A person arrested without a warrant and charged by information to a timely preliminary hearing on probable cause.
Gideon v. Wainwright (1963) Sixth Amendment requires states to pay for attorneys for indigent criminal defendants.
Gilbert v. California (1967) A handwriting exemplar simply identifies a physical characteristic and is therefore outside of the Fifth Amendment’s protection.
Giles v. California (2008) For testimonial statements to be admissible under the forfeiture exception to hearsay, the defendant must have intended to make the witness unavailable for trial.
Graves v. United States (1893) Where objection is made in a criminal trial to comments upon facts not in evidence or statements having no connection with the case or exaggerated expressions of the prosecuting officer, it is the duty of the court to interfere and put a stop to them if they are likely to be prejudicial to the accused.
Griffin v. California (1965) A prosecutor may not comment during closing arguments about the defendant's failure to testify at trial.
Griswold v. Connecticut (1965) The Constitution protects the right of marital privacy against state restrictions on contraception.
Hanley v. Donoghue (1885)
Harris v. New York (1971) The Miranda decision did not mandate that evidence inadmissible against an accused in the prosecution's case must be barred for all purposes from the trial.
Hartman et al. v. Moore (2006) Plaintiffs alleging retaliatory prosecution must prove that the law enforcement agents lacked probable cause.
Hawkins v. United States (1958) Voluntary testimonies by spouses in court are admissible.
Heien v. North Carolina (2014) A police officer's reasonable mistake of law can provide the individualized suspicion required by the Fourth Amendment to justify a traffic stop.
Hendrix v. United States (1911) A deceased witness's previous testimony did not violate the defendant's right to confront witnesses, as long as the defendant had the opportunity to cross-examine the witness during the preliminary hearing.
Herring v. United States (2009) Evidence obtained after illegal searches or arrests based on simple police mistakes are not subject to the use of the Exclusionary Rule.
Hester v. United States (1924) “Opens field doctrine”; protection against unreasonable searches and seizures does not extend to open fields and other areas outside the "curtilage" of a home.
Hiibel v. Sixth Judicial District Court (2004) Requiring suspects to disclose their names during a valid Terry Stop does not violate the Fourth Amendment if the statute first requires reasonable suspicion of criminal involvement.
Holden v. Hardy (1898) The US Supreme Court held a limitation on working time for miners and smelters as constitutional.
Holland v. United States (1954)
Holt v. United States (1910)
Horton v. California (1990) The Fourth Amendment does not prohibit the warrantless seizure of evidence in plain view.
Howes v. Fields (2012) Not all interactions between inmates and authorities within a prison setting trigger the need for Miranda warnings.
Huddleston v. United States (1988) Requiring the trial court to make a preliminary ruling before admitting character evidence is contrary to Article IV of the Federal Rules of Evidence.
Hudson v. Michigan (2006) A violation of the “knock-and-announce” rule does not require the suppression of evidence found in a search pursuant to a valid warrant.
Hurtado v. California (1884) Federal right to grand jury is not incorporated to the states.
Illinois v. Caballes (2005) A traffic stop is a "seizure," and requires reasonable suspicion.
Illinois v. Gates (1983) “Totality of the circumstances” test.
Illinois v. Krull (1987) Exclusionary rule should not be applied when law enforcement officers reasonably rely on a statute that is later declared unconstitutional.
Illinois v. Lidster (2004) Permits the police to use a roadblock to investigate a traffic incident.
Illinois v. Wardlow (2000) Sudden flight in a high crime area does not create a reasonable suspicion justifying a Terry stop.
Indianapolis v. Edmond (2000) Police may not conduct vehicle searches, specifically ones involving drug-sniffing police dogs, at a checkpoint or roadblock without reasonable suspicion.
In re Gault (1967) 14th Amendment Due Process Clause applies to juvenile defendants.
In re Winship (1970) Established proof beyond a reasonable doubt as the burden in juvenile cases.
Jackson v. Virginia (1979) A federal court must consider whether there was sufficient evidence to justify a rational trier of fact to find guilt.
Jaffee v. Richmond (1996) Psychotherapist-patient privilege in the Federal Rules of Evidence.
Jin Fuey Moy v. United States (1916) Protections against unreasonable searches and seizures apply to all individuals within the United States, regardless of their immigration status.
Kansas v. Glover (2020) A police officer had reasonable suspicion to stop a vehicle after he learned that the owner of the vehicle had a revoked license.
Kansas v. Ventris (2009) Defendant's statements made to an undercover informant surreptitiously acting as an agent for the State are not admissible at trial for any reason.
Katz v. United States (1967) Expansion past the trespass approach to the right to privacy.
Kaupp v. Texas (2003) A confession that results from an illegal arrest must be suppressed unless the conditions of the confession indicated it was not influenced by the illegal arrest.
Kentucky v. Stincer (1987) When a child's competency to testify is raised, the judge is required to resolve whether the child is capable of observing, recollecting, and narrating the facts, and whether the child has a moral sense of the obligation to tell the truth.
Kentucky v. Whorton (1979)
Kirby v. Illinois (1972) Right to counsel does not attach during a pre-indictment identification.
Kirby v. U.S. (1899) Statutes must be constructed reasonably.
Knowles v. Iowa (1998) Prohibits a police officer from further searching a vehicle which was stopped for a minor traffic offense once the officer has written a citation for the offense.
Kyllo v. United States (2001) Use of thermal imaging devices to monitor heat of home, even from a public street, requires a search warrant.
Lamar v. Micou (1885) The law of the domicile governs the status of a person, and the disposition and management of his movable property.
Leary v. United States (1969) The Marijuana Tax Act was unconstitutional because it required individuals to self-incriminate by registering with the government before obtaining the drug.
Leeper v. Texas (1891)
Lego v. Twomey (1972) When a confession is challenged by a defendant as involuntary, he is entitled to a reliable and clear-cut determination that the confession was in fact voluntarily rendered.
Leland v. Oregon (1952) Placing the burden of persuasion on the defendant when they argue an insanity defense in a criminal trial.
Logan v. United States (1892) The "civil rights restored" exemption of convictions for sentence-enhancement purposes did not extend to a defendant who retained his civil rights at all times.
Los Angeles v. Patel (2015) No longer requires hotel operators to retain records about guests for a ninety-day period.
Malloy v. Hogan (1964) Fifth Amendment privilege against compelled self-incrimination applies to state courts.
Mapp v. Ohio (1961) Fourth Amendment exclusionary rule is incorporated to the states.
Martin v. Ohio (1987) The presumption of innocence requiring prosecution to prove each element of a crime beyond a reasonable doubt only applies to elements of the offense.
Maryland v. Buie (1990) Protective sweep doctrine.
Maryland v. King (2013) A cheek swab of an arrestee's DNA is comparable to fingerprinting.
Maryland v. Shatzer (2010) Police may re-open questioning of a suspect who has asked for counsel, if there has been a 14-day or more break in Miranda custody.
Massachusetts v. Sheppard (1984) What is the standard for officers who execute an invalid search warrant signed by a judge?
Mattox v. United States (1895) Dying declarations are admissible on a trial for murder as to the fact of the homicide.
McDonald v. City of Chicago (2010) The right to self-defense is "fundamental" and "deeply rooted" and applies to the states.
McNabb v. United States (1943) Confessions or statements made by a suspect during a period of unnecessary delay between arrest and arraignment might be considered involuntary and inadmissible.
Melendez-Diaz v. Massachusetts (2009) Does a prosecutor's plea agreement that a cooperating defendant be given the minimum sentence authorize a judge to depart below a statutory minimum?
Michelson v. United States (1948) A character witness may be cross-examined as to an arrest whether or not it culminated in a conviction.
Michigan v. Bryant (2011) Further developed the "primary purpose" test to determine whether statements are "testimonial" for Confrontation Clause purposes.
Michigan v. Harvey (1990) Limited the rights of the accused by allowing evidence obtained in violation of the Sixth Amendment right to counsel to be admitted to impeach a defendant's testimony.
Michigan v. Jackson (1986) If the police initiate an interrogation after a defendant asserts their right to counsel at an arraignment or similar proceeding, any waiver of that right for that interrogation is invalid.
Michigan v. Long (1983) When state court decisions appeared to rest primarily on federal law, it would infer that state courts believed that federal law required them to do so.
Michigan v. Sitz (1990) Are police sobriety checkpoints constitutional?
Miller v. Fenton (1985) The voluntariness of a confession is not an issue of fact.
Mima Queen and Child v. Hepburn (1813) Hearsay evidence is not admissible to prove that the ancestor from whom they claim was free.
Mincey v. Arizona (1978) The warrantless search of a homicide scene is permissible under the Fourth and Fourteenth Amendments.
Minnesota v. Dickerson (1993) Officers conducting a lawful patdown search for weapons may seize non-weapon contraband in plain view (feel).
Miranda v. Arizona (1966) Suspects must be advised of rights to remain silent and to counsel before custodial interrogation
Missouri v. McNeely (2013) The natural metabolization of alcohol does not present a per se exigency that justifies an exception to the Fourth Amendment's search warrant requirement.
Mitchell v. Wisconsin (2019) When a driver is unconscious and cannot be given a breath test, the exigent-circumstances doctrine generally permits a blood test without a warrant.
Montana v. Egelhoff (1996) Defendants do not have an absolute constitutional right to present all relevant evidence in their defense.
Montejo v. Louisiana (2009) A represented defendant could both waive his sixth amendment right to counsel and face police interrogation without his counsel being present.
Moore v. Illinois (1977) The prosecution cannot use evidence derived from the violation of the petitioner’s Sixth and Fourteenth Amendment’s right to counsel.
Moore v. Illinois (1972)
Murray v. United States (1988) Police officers' illegal entry upon private premises did not require suppression of evidence subsequently discovered at those premises when executing a search warrant obtained on the basis of information wholly unconnected with the initial entry.
Nardone v. United States (1939) Evidence obtained by federal agents by tapping telephone wires and intercepting messages is not admissible in a criminal trial in the federal district court.
Neder v. United States (1999) The failure to instruct the jury on an essential element of the offense is subject to harmless error review.
Neil v. Biggers (1972) Establishes guidelines for evaluating the reliability of eyewitness identifications.
New Jersey v. T. L. O. (1985) What is the standard for searches of students conducted by public school officials?
New York v. Belton (1981) The entire passenger compartment of an automobile is subject to search under the search incident doctrine even if the arrestee is out of the car.
New York v. Quarles (1984) The public safety exception to Miranda.
Nix v. Williams (1984) The "inevitable discovery" exception to the exclusionary rule.
Obergefell v. Hodges (2015) The 14th Amendment requires all states to license marriages between same-sex couples and to recognize all marriages that were lawfully performed out of state.
Oliver v. United States (1984) An individual may not legitimately demand privacy for activities conducted out of doors in fields, except in the area immediately surrounding the home.
Olmstead v. United States (1928) Does wiretapping violate the Fourth or Fifth Amendments?
Oregon v. Bradshaw (1983) A properly Mirandized suspect waives a right to counsel by initiating further conversation about his or her case.
Oregon v. Hass (1975) A defendant's testimony at trial could be impeached with statements made after being given Miranda warnings and choosing to speak without an attorney present.
Ornelas v. United States (1996) The ultimate questions of reasonable suspicion to stop and probable cause to make a warrantless search should be reviewed de novo.
Patterson v. New York (1977) The affirmative defense of extreme emotional disturbance is something that a murder defendant can be required to prove.
Patton v. United States (1930) The jury should consist of twelve people, neither more nor less; (2) that the trial should be in the presence and under the superintendence of a judge having power to instruct them as to the law and advise them in respect of the facts, and (3) that the verdict should be unanimous.
Pena-Rodriguez v. Colorado (2017) The Sixth Amendment requires a racial bias exception to the no-impeachment rule.
P.P.L. Mont. v. L.L.C. Montana (2012)
U.S. Preston v. United States (1964) When a person is lawfully arrested, the police have the right, without a search warrant, to make a contemporaneous search of the person of the accused for weapons or for the fruits of or implements used to commit the crime
Rakas v. Illinois (1978) The "legitimately on the property" requirement of Jones v. United States, for challenging the legality of a police search, was too broad.
Rawlings v. Kentucky (1980)
Reagan v. United States (1895) On the trial of any other felony, the defendant shall be entitled to ten and the United States to three peremptory challenges, and in all other cases, civil and criminal, each party shall be entitled to three peremptory challenges.
Riley v. California (2014) The warrantless search and seizure of digital contents of a cell phone during an arrest is unconstitutional.
Ring v. Arizona (2002) Who can evaluate aggravating factors necessary for the death penalty - judge or jury?
Rivera v. Delaware (1976)
Riverside v. McLaughlin (1991) Suspects who are arrested without a warrant must be provided a probable cause hearing within 48 hours of their arrest, but need not have their probable cause hearing as soon as police complete the administrative steps incident to arrest.
Rochin v. California (1952) Stomach-pumping constitutes a method of obtaining evidence that violates the Due Process Clause.
Rock v. Arkansas (1987) Criminal defendants have a right to testify on their own behalf.
Rodriguez v. United States (2015) A police stop exceeding the time needed to handle the matter for which the stop was made violates the Constitution’s shield against unreasonable seizures.
Rosen v. United States (1896)
Rose v. Clark (1986) Jury instructions must be evaluated in context, and a single erroneous or unclear part of the instruction may not be sufficient to overturn a conviction if the overall instruction adequately conveys the concept of reasonable doubt.
Rothgery v. Gillespie County (2008) A criminal defendant's initial appearance before a magistrate judge marks the initiation of adversary judicial proceedings that trigger attachment of the Sixth Amendment right to counsel.
Roviaro v. United States (1957) Where the identity of an informant or the contents of an informant's communications are relevant and helpful to a defense, the government's privilege must give way.
Salinas v. Texas (2013) A defendant has a right to remain silent and this may not be used to her detriment.
Samson v. California (2006) Can police search a parolee's residence without a warrant or probable cause?
Sandstrom v. Montana (1979) Prohibits a State from making use of jury instructions that have the effect of relieving the State of the burden of proof on the critical question of intent in a criminal prosecution.
Schmerber v. California (1966) Forced extraction and analysis of a blood sample is not compelled testimony.
Schneckloth v. Bustamonte (1973) Cons ent searches are constitutional, and the government must show that consent existed. However, a defendant under the Fourth Amendment need not necessarily know of his right to object to a consent search.
Shapleigh v. Mier (1937)
Siegert v. Gilley (1991Government officials are entitled to qualified immunity from civil damages unless their conduct violates "clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would have known."
Smith v. Doe (2003) Sex offender registration laws do not violate the Ex Post Facto Clause.
Smith v. Illinois (1968) An accused who, during custodial interrogation, has expressed his desire to deal with the police only through counsel is not subject to further interrogation by the authorities until counsel has been made available to him unless he validly waives his earlier request for the assistance of counsel.
Smith v. Maryland (1979)Fourth Amendment protections are only relevant if the individual believes that the government has infringed on the individual's reasonable expectation of privacy.
Smith v. Ohio (1990) Evidence found during a purported search incident to arrest cannot be relied upon to justify the arrest.
Sosna v. Iowa (1975) A plaintiff who meets the requirements for standing at the outset of a class-action lawsuit can continue to represent the class even if their individual claim becomes moot during the course of litigation.
South Dakota v. Neville (1983) A defendant's refusal to take a blood-alcohol test can be introduced as evidence against them in a criminal trial for DUI.
South Dakota v. Opperman (1976) The Community Caretaker exception.
Spinelli v. United States (1969) Can police cite anonymous informants to support search warrant requests?
Stanton v. Stanton (1975) Struck down Utah's definitions of adulthood as a violation of equal protection.
State v. Von Raab (1989) Mandatory drug testing of certain government employees.
Stein v. Bowman (1839) Neither a husband nor a wife can be a witness for or against the other.
Strickland v. Washington (1984) The standard for determining when a criminal defendant's Sixth Amendment right to counsel is violated by that counsel's inadequate performance.
Strickler v. Greene (1999) Preserved reasonable probability as the standard by which to measure whether the defendant received a fair trial in the absence of certain exculpatory material undisclosed to the defense.
Sullivan v. Louisiana (1993) A constitutionally deficient reasonable-doubt instruction cannot be a harmless error.
Swidler & Berlin v. United States (1998) The attorney-client privilege survives the client's death, and it can only be waived by the client or, after the client's death, by the personal representative of the deceased client's estate.
Tanner v. United States (1987) Juror testimony could not be used to impeach a jury verdict even when the jury had been consuming copious amounts of alcohol, marijuana, and cocaine during the course of the trial.
Tenet v. Doe (2005) Spies cannot sue the CIA or the United States government to enforce an espionage contract.
Thornton v. United States (2004) When a police officer makes a lawful custodial arrest of an automobile's occupant, the Fourth Amendment allows the officer to search the vehicle's passenger compartment as a contemporaneous incident of arrest.
Totten v. United States (1875) The government could invoke the state secrets privilege to prevent the disclosure of certain information in court if its revelation would be detrimental to national security.
Tot v. United States (1943) A statutory presumption cannot be sustained if there is no rational connection in common experience between the fact proved and the ultimate fact presumed.
Townsend v. Sain (1963) Federal courts should hold evidentiary hearings when presented with petitions for habeas corpus by state prisoners following denial of postconviction relief in state court.
Trammel v. United States (1980) A witness may not be compelled to testify or foreclosed from testifying.
Turner v. United States (1919)
Twining v. New Jersey (1908) Established the Incorporation Doctrine.
United States v. Agurs (1976) The prosecution was required to disclose evidence creates a reasonable doubt that did not otherwise exist.
United States v. Bagley (1985) The government’s failure to disclose contacts in discovery does not violate the Due Process Clause.
United States v. Dunn (1987) A search warrant is not needed to peer into the open side of a barn that is located in a field on private property.
United States v. Karo (1984) A party unknowingly receiving a container containing a tracking device does not constitute a Fourth Amendment seizure.
United States v. Knotts (1983) The use of a radio transmitter to track the movements of a suspect in a car falls under the privacy expectations for a vehicle, which are less than those of a house.
United States v. Leon (1984) The Court established the "good faith" exception to the Fourth Amendment exclusionary rule.
United States v. Matlock (1974) Hearsay is admissible evidence at a suppression hearing.
United States v. Nixon (1974) The President does not have executive privilege in immunity from subpoenas or other civil court actions.
United States v. Patane (2004) Physical evidence obtained from un-Mirandized statements, as long as those statements were not forced by police, are constitutionally admissible, although the actual statements may not be.
United States v. Reynolds (1953) Congress could not outlaw a belief in the correctness of polygamy, it could outlaw the practice thereof.
United States v. Robinson (1973) A full search of the person is not only an exception to the warrant requirement of the Fourth Amendment, but is also a "reasonable" search under that Amendment.
United States v. Scheffer (1998) Polygraph evidence inadmissible in court-martial proceedings.
United States v. Wade (1967) A criminal defendant has a Sixth Amendment right to counsel at a lineup held after indictment.
Upjohn Co. v. United States (1981) A company could invoke the attorney–client privilege to protect communications made between company lawyers and non-management employees.
Utah v. Strieff (2016) The discovery of a valid arrest warrant was a sufficient intervening event to break the causal chain between the unlawful stop and the discovery of drug-related evidence.
Vernonia School Dist. 47J v. Acton (1995) Random drug testing is constitutional in schools.
Victor v. Nebraska (1994) So long as the court instructs the jury on the necessity that the defendant's guilt be proven beyond a reasonable doubt, the Constitution does not require that any particular form of words be used in advising the jury of the government's burden of proof.
Warden v. Hayden (1967) The Fourth Amendment does not distinguish between instrumentalities or fruits of a crime and other evidence.
Washington v. Recuenco (2006) Blakely violations do not necessarily render a criminal trial unfair or an unreliable vehicle for determining guilt or innocence.
Weeks v. United States (1914) Creation of the Fourth Amendment Exclusionary Rule.
Wilson v. Arkansas (1995) The common-law "knock-and announce" principle forms part of the Fourth Amendment reasonableness inquiry.
Winston v. Lee (1985) Surgery is too invasive to be used to seize evidence.
Wong Sun v. United States (1963) An illegal arrest did not so contaminate the voluntary pre confession statements so as to prevent the use by the officers of the information given therein.
Wyatt v. United States (1960)
Wyoming v. Houghton (1999) Can officers in traffic stop search passengers' belongings?
Youngblood v. West Virginia (2006) Does the suppression of evidence favorable to the defense constitute a Brady violation?

This site offers education, not legal advice. Please consult with an attorney for advice in legal matters.

Page updated

Google Sites

Report abuse