51 Cited authorities

Batson v. Kentucky
476 U.S. 79 (1986) Cited 15,241 times 61 Legal Analyses
Holding that the Equal Protection Clause applies to the use of peremptory strikes
Daniels v. Williams
474 U.S. 327 (1986) Cited 12,738 times 5 Legal Analyses
Holding that "the Due Process Clause [of the Fourteenth Amendment] is simply not implicated by a negligent act of an official causing unintended loss of or injury to life, liberty, or property"
Wolff v. McDonnell
418 U.S. 539 (1974) Cited 19,248 times 5 Legal Analyses
Holding that declaratory judgment as a predicate to a damages award would not be barred, but that a civil rights claim that would affect the duration of incarceration is foreclosed by Preiser
Chapman v. California
386 U.S. 18 (1967) Cited 23,488 times 28 Legal Analyses
Holding that error is harmless only if "harmless beyond a reasonable doubt"
Deshaney v. Winnebago Cty. Soc. Servs. Dept
489 U.S. 189 (1989) Cited 5,618 times 8 Legal Analyses
Holding that negligence by a county social services department which left a child permanently brain damaged by his abusive father did not shock the conscience
Colorado v. Connelly
479 U.S. 157 (1986) Cited 4,823 times 12 Legal Analyses
Holding that the government bears the burden of proving the validity of a Miranda waiver by a preponderance of the evidence
Hernandez v. New York
500 U.S. 352 (1991) Cited 3,862 times 17 Legal Analyses
Holding that evaluation of a prosecutor's credibility "lies `peculiarly within a trial judge's province'"
Perry v. New Hampshire
565 U.S. 228 (2012) Cited 1,360 times 2 Legal Analyses
Holding that courts need not inquire into the reliability of an eyewitness identification when it is not procured "under unnecessarily suggestive circumstances"
Flagg Bros., Inc. v. Brooks
436 U.S. 149 (1978) Cited 3,619 times 1 Legal Analyses
Holding that the defendant warehouseman's sale of goods pursuant to a statute authorizing self-help was not state action
Deck v. Missouri
544 U.S. 622 (2005) Cited 1,170 times 6 Legal Analyses
Holding that the Constitution "prohibit the use of physical restraints visible to the jury absent a trial court determination, in the exercise of its discretion, that they are justified by a state interest specific to a particular trial"

The People, Respondent,v.Joel Nelson, Appellant.

51 Cited authorities

Holding that the Equal Protection Clause applies to the use of peremptory strikes

Holding that "the Due Process Clause [of the Fourteenth Amendment] is simply not implicated by a negligent act of an official causing unintended loss of or injury to life, liberty, or property"

Holding that declaratory judgment as a predicate to a damages award would not be barred, but that a civil rights claim that would affect the duration of incarceration is foreclosed by Preiser

Holding that error is harmless only if "harmless beyond a reasonable doubt"

Holding that negligence by a county social services department which left a child permanently brain damaged by his abusive father did not shock the conscience

Holding that the government bears the burden of proving the validity of a Miranda waiver by a preponderance of the evidence

Holding that evaluation of a prosecutor's credibility "lies `peculiarly within a trial judge's province'"

Holding that courts need not inquire into the reliability of an eyewitness identification when it is not procured "under unnecessarily suggestive circumstances"

Holding that the defendant warehouseman's sale of goods pursuant to a statute authorizing self-help was not state action

Holding that the Constitution "prohibit the use of physical restraints visible to the jury absent a trial court determination, in the exercise of its discretion, that they are justified by a state interest specific to a particular trial"