Supreme Court - Sliplists, 549 U. S., Part 1

549 U. S., Part 1

Purcell v. Gonzalez, 549 U. S. 1 (2006) (per curiam)

R001; No. 06A375; 10/20/06. Ninth Circuit's order enjoining operation of Arizona's voter identification rules just weeks before an election is vacated and the cases are remanded.

Ayers v. Belmontes, 549 U. S. __ (2006)

R002; No. 05-493; 11/13/06. California's "factor (k)" jury instruction is consistent with the constitutional right to present mitigating evidence in capital sentencing proceedings.

Lopez v. Gonzales, 549 U. S. __ (2006)

R003; No. 05-547; 12/05/06. Conduct made a felony under state law but a misdemeanor under the federal Controlled Substances Act (CSA) is not a "felony punishable under the [CSA]" for immigration law purposes, and thus does not disqualify Lopez, a deported alien, from eligibility for discretionary cancellation of removal by the Attorney General.

Toledo-Flores v. United States, 549 U. S. __ (2006)

R004; No. 05-7664; 12/05/06. Certiorari dismissed as improvidently granted.

Carey v. Musladin, 549 U. S. ___ (2006)

R005; No. 05-785; 12/11/06. Because the effect on a defendant's fair-trial rights of a victim's family sitting in the spectators' gallery at trial wearing buttons displaying the victim's image is an open question in this Court's jurisprudence, the Ninth Circuit improperly concluded that the California Court of Appeal's decision to uphold Musladin's conviction was contrary to or an unreasonable application of clearly established federal law as determined by this Court.

BP America Production Co. v. Burton, 549 U. S. ___ (2006)

R006; No. 05-669; 12/11/06. Title 28 U. S. C. �15(a)'s 6-year statute of limitations applies only to court actions, not to the administrative payment orders involved in this case.

United States v. Resendiz-Ponce, 549 U. S. ___ (2007)

R007; No. 05-998; 1/9/07. Respondent's indictment for violating 8 U. S. C. �26(a) by attempting to reenter the United States after having been deported was not defective, and, thus, this Court need not reach the issue whether the asserted defect was subject to harmless-error review.

MedImmune, Inc. v. Genentech, Inc., 549 U. S. ___ (2007)

R008; No. 05-608; 1/9/07. The Federal Circuit erred in affirming the dismissal of petitioner's declaratory-judgment action for lack of subject-matter jurisdiction based on Circuit precedent holding that a patent licensee in good standing cannot establish an Article III case or controversy with regard to the patent's validity, enforceability, or scope.

Burton v. Stewart, 549 U. S. ___ (2007) (per curiam)

R009; No. 05-9222; 1/9/07. Because Burton did not seek or obtain an order from the Court of Appeals authorizing him to file a "second or successive" habeas petition, as required by 28 U. S. C. �44(b)(3), the District Court never had jurisdiction to consider his petition challenging the constitutionality of his sentence.

Norfolk Southern R. Co. v. Sorrell, 549 U. S. ___ (2007) (per curiam)

R010; No. 05-746; 1/10/07. The same causation standard applies to railroad negligence under Section 1 of the Federal Employers' Liability Act as to employee contributory negligence under Section 3.

Gonzales v. Duenas-Alvarez, 549 U. S. ___ (2007) (per curiam)

R011; No. 05-1629; 1/17/07. Title 8 U. S. C. �01(a)(43)(G)'s term "theft offense," conviction of which warrants an alien's removal from the United States, �27(a)(2)(A), includes the crime of "aiding and abetting" a theft offense.

Jones v. Bock, 549 U. S. ___ (2007)

R012; No. 05-7058; 1/22/07. Sixth Circuit rules implementing the Prison Litigation Reform Act of 1995's exhaustion of administrative remedies requirement and facilitating early screening of prisoner federal-court suits are not required by the PLRA; crafting and imposing such rules exceeds the proper limits of the judicial role.

Osborn v. Haley, 549 U. S. ___ (2007)

R013; No. 05-593; 1/22/07. Under the Westfall Act, once the Attorney General certifies that a federal official sued in a state court was acting in the scope of his employment, the United States is substituted as defendant, and the case is removed to federal court, exclusive competence to adjudicate the case resides in the federal court, and that court may not remand the suit to the state court; Westfall Act certification is proper when a federal officer charged with misconduct asserts, and the Attorney General determines, that the incident or episode in suit never occurred.

Cunningham v. California, 549 U. S. ___ (2007)

R014; No. 05-6551; 1/22/07. California's determinate sentencing law, by placing sentence-elevating factfinding within the judge's province, violates a defendant's right to trial by jury safeguarded by the Sixth and Fourteenth Amendments.

Search Tip: Use the binocular icons to search within PDF documents.

(To view PDF files) Adobe Access PDF to HTML conversion

Last Updated: January 17, 2007
Page Name: http://www.supremecourtus.gov/opinions/sliplists/s549pt1.html