73 Cited authorities

  1. Bousley v. United States

    523 U.S. 614 (1998)   Cited 13,639 times   10 Legal Analyses
    Holding that the rule announced in Bailey v. United States, 516 U.S. 137, 116 S.Ct. 501, 133 L.Ed.2d 472, which narrowed the scope of the term "use" in § 924(c), applied retroactively
  2. Strickler v. Greene

    527 U.S. 263 (1999)   Cited 6,395 times   20 Legal Analyses
    Holding that a newspaper article detailing that a witness had been interviewed by the police did not suffice to put a defendant's lawyer on notice that records and evidence concerning the witness existed and had been suppressed
  3. Clapper v. Amnesty Int'l USA

    568 U.S. 398 (2013)   Cited 3,064 times   169 Legal Analyses
    Holding that respondents could not establish injury by relying on a "speculative chain of possibilities"
  4. Brady v. Maryland

    373 U.S. 83 (1963)   Cited 43,501 times   133 Legal Analyses
    Holding that the prosecution violates due process when it suppresses material, favorable evidence
  5. Teague v. Lane

    489 U.S. 288 (1989)   Cited 7,712 times   99 Legal Analyses
    Holding that the rule announced in Taylor v. Louisiana requiring the jury venire be drawn from a fair cross section of the community is procedural and does not apply retroactively
  6. Davis v. U.S.

    564 U.S. 229 (2011)   Cited 2,240 times   47 Legal Analyses
    Holding "newly announced rules of constitutional criminal procedure 'must apply retroactively to all cases, state or federal, pending on direct review or not yet final, with no exception.'"
  7. Giglio v. United States

    405 U.S. 150 (1972)   Cited 12,228 times   29 Legal Analyses
    Holding that prosecution must disclose all information or material that may be used to impeach the credibility of prosecution witnesses where witness's credibility is "an important issue in the case"
  8. Bracy v. Gramley

    520 U.S. 899 (1997)   Cited 3,033 times   6 Legal Analyses
    Holding that "the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment establishes a constitutional floor, not a uniform standard" and noting the existence of many laws that legislate above that constitutional minimum
  9. Stone v. Powell

    428 U.S. 465 (1976)   Cited 6,015 times   13 Legal Analyses
    Holding that as long as the state provided the petitioner an "opportunity for full and fair litigation of a Fourth Amendment claim," a federal court may not grant habeas relief on such a claim
  10. United States v. Armstrong

    517 U.S. 456 (1996)   Cited 2,201 times   4 Legal Analyses
    Holding that “in the absence of clear evidence to the contrary, courts presume that [government officials] have properly discharged their official duties”
  11. Section 2255 - Federal custody; remedies on motion attacking sentence

    28 U.S.C. § 2255   Cited 129,499 times   129 Legal Analyses
    Adopting one-year limitations period for §2255 motions
  12. Section 3500 - Demands for production of statements and reports of witnesses

    18 U.S.C. § 3500   Cited 5,365 times   6 Legal Analyses
    Requiring the government to produce "any statement," including testimony provided before the grand jury, only after the witness has testified on direct examination at trial
  13. Section 2510 - Definitions

    18 U.S.C. § 2510   Cited 4,254 times   79 Legal Analyses
    Defining "[i]nvestigative or law enforcement officer" as an officer "empowered by law to conduct investigations of or to make arrests for [certain] offenses . . . and any attorney authorized by law to prosecute or participate in the prosecution of such offenses"
  14. Section 2339A - Providing material support to terrorists

    18 U.S.C. § 2339A   Cited 487 times   4 Legal Analyses
    Defining “ ‘material support or resources' ” as “any property, tangible or intangible ”
  15. Section 1801 - Definitions

    50 U.S.C. § 1801   Cited 280 times   10 Legal Analyses
    Defining "United States person" to be a "citizen of the United States, an alien lawfully admitted for permanent residence" or certain unincorporated associations or corporations with ties to the United States
  16. Section 2332a - Use of weapons of mass destruction

    18 U.S.C. § 2332a   Cited 222 times   3 Legal Analyses
    Prohibiting the threatened, attempted, or actual use of a weapon of mass destruction
  17. Section 1806 - Use of information

    50 U.S.C. § 1806   Cited 169 times   4 Legal Analyses
    Allowing in camera , ex parte review of the legality of electronic surveillance under FISA Subchapter I if "the Attorney General files an affidavit under oath that disclosure or an adversary hearing would harm the national security of the United States"
  18. Section 1881a - Procedures for targeting certain persons outside the United States other than United States persons

    50 U.S.C. § 1881a   Cited 75 times   11 Legal Analyses
    Permitting review of FISA orders by the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court
  19. Section 1825 - Use of information

    50 U.S.C. § 1825   Cited 35 times

    (a) Compliance with minimization procedures; lawful purposes Information acquired from a physical search conducted pursuant to this subchapter concerning any United States person may be used and disclosed by Federal officers and employees without the consent of the United States person only in accordance with the minimization procedures required by this subchapter. No information acquired from a physical search pursuant to this subchapter may be used or disclosed by Federal officers or employees

  20. Section 1881e - Use of information acquired under this subchapter

    50 U.S.C. § 1881e   Cited 12 times
    Stating that information acquired under § 702 is subject to the notice requirement in § 1806(c)