https://www.lsd.law/briefs/view/standefer-v-united-states-107520464
Standefer v. United States Case Brief Summary: A person is appealing their conviction for aiding and abetting a federal crime, arguing that they should not have been convicted after the person who actually committed the crime was found not guilty. Standefer v. United States Case Brief Summary: A person is appealing their conviction for aiding

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=80dvsLWtnBg
Get more case briefs explained with Quimbee. Quimbee has over 16,300 case briefs (and counting) keyed to 223 casebooks https://www.quimbee.com/case-briefs-

https://staging.lsd.law/briefs/view/standefer-v-united-states-107520464
Standefer v. United States Case Brief Summary: A man authorized payments for vacation trips to an IRS agent who was auditing a company's tax returns, and he was found guilty of aiding and abetting the agent in accepting compensation. Standefer v. United States Case Brief Summary: A man authorized payments for vacation trips to an IRS agent

https://www.casebriefs.com/blog/law/criminal-procedure/criminal-procedure-keyed-to-israel/arrest-search-and-seizure/thornton-v-united-states-2/
Citation541 U.S. 615, 124 S. Ct. 2127, 158 L. Ed. 2d 905 (2004) Brief Fact Summary. Petitioner appealed gun charges that were brought against him when his car was searched after he had exited it and had already been arrested. Synopsis of Rule of Law. Under the search incident to arrest exception of the Fourth

https://www.casebriefs.com/blog/law/international-law/international-law-keyed-to-damrosche/chapter-2/military-and-paramilitary-activities-in-and-against-nicaragua-nicaragua-v-united-states/
CitationI.C.J. 1984 I.C.J. 39 Brief Fact Summary. Nicaragua (P) brought a suit against the United States (D) on the ground that the United States (D) was responsible for illegal military and paramilitary activities in and against Nicaragua. The jurisdiction of the International Court of Justice to entertain the case as well as the admissibility of.

https://www.casebriefs.com/blog/law/criminal-law/criminal-law-keyed-to-johnson/mens-rea-criminal-law-keyed-to-johnson/screws-v-united-states/
The judge instructed the jury that Hall was guilty if they believed he wrongfully assaulted Hall and intended his injuries. Defendant was convicted of both the crime and conspiracy of the same crime. The circuit court of appeals affirmed his conviction. The United States Supreme Court granted certiorari.

https://listverse.com/2023/04/09/top-10-court-cases-that-changed-the-u-s-justice-system/
Background. In 1961, Clarence Gideon was arrested and charged with breaking and entering. Gideon could not afford a lawyer and was ultimately convicted and sentenced to five years in prison. Gideon petitioned the U.S. Supreme Court, arguing that his Sixth Amendment right to counsel had been violated.

https://legaldictionary.net/hudson-v-michigan/
Following is the case brief for Hudson v. Michigan, United States Supreme Court, (2006) Case summary for Hudson v. Michigan: Police arrived at Hudson's home after obtaining a warrant. Three to five seconds after announcing their presence, police entered Hudson's home and found drugs and a firearm. At trial, Hudson moved to have the evidence

https://legaldictionary.net/marbury-v-madison/
Following is the case brief for Marbury v. Madison, United States Supreme Court, (1803) Case Summary of Marbury v. Madison. Madison failed to finalize the former president's appointment of William Marbury as Justice of the Peace. Marbury directly petitioned the Supreme Court for an equitable remedy in the form of a writ of mandamus.

https://www.oyez.org/cases/2004/04-368
Unanimous decision for Arthur Andersen LLPmajority opinion by William H. Rehnquist. No. In a unanimous opinion delivered by Chief Justice William H. Rehnquist, the Court held that the jury instructions failed to convey that the federal document law required a "consciousness of wrongdoing" for conviction. There was nothing inherently corrupt in

https://www.law.cornell.edu/supct/cert/04-368
In June of 2002, Arthur Andersen LLP ("Andersen") was convicted in a jury trial in the U.S. District Court in Houston, Texas, of "corruptly persuading" employees to destroy Enron-related documents in anticipation of an SEC investigation (see indictment for details of the charges and 18 U.S.C. § 1512(b) for the applicable law). The judge ordered Andersen to pay $500,000 and serve an up-to-five

https://www.c-span.org/classroom/document/?19865
United States (1945) | C-SPAN Classroom. October 18, 2022. Bell Ringer: Screws v. United States (1945) Screws v. United States (1945) Northeastern University's Civil Rights and Restorative

https://legaldictionary.net/graham-v-connor/
ContentsGraham v. Connor Case Brief Following is the case brief for Graham v. Connor, 490 U.S. 386 (1989). Case Summary of Graham v. Connor Petitioner Graham had an oncoming insulin reaction because of his diabetes. Respondent Connor and other respondent police officers perceived his behavior as suspicious. In conducting an investigatory stop, the officers inflicted multiple injuries on Graham

https://www.ourfamilywizard.com/blog/grandparent-rights-family-law-case-explained
Grandparent rights refer to the legal rights of grandparents to have access to and maintain a relationship with their grandchildren. These rights can arise in situations where the parents of the children divorce, separate, pass away, or are involved in a child custody case. Although grandparent rights do not automatically apply in all

https://www.oyez.org/cases/2014/13-7451
The district court found Yates guilty of disposing of undersized fish and therefore in violation of a statute that makes it a crime to destroy or conceal "a tangible object with the intent to impede, obstruct, or influence" a governmental investigation. The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit affirmed.

https://www.quimbee.com/cases/arthur-andersen-llp-v-united-states
Get Arthur Andersen LLP v. United States, 544 U.S. 696, 125 S.Ct. 2129, 161 L.Ed.2d 1008 (2005), United States Supreme Court, case facts, key issues, and holdings and reasonings online today. Written and curated by real attorneys at Quimbee.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nkxw4RJmr5I
Get more case briefs explained with Quimbee. Quimbee has over 16,300 case briefs (and counting) keyed to 223 casebooks https://www.quimbee.com/case-briefs-

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=alC_Vtst4Pw
Get more case briefs explained with Quimbee. Quimbee has over 16,300 case briefs (and counting) keyed to 223 casebooks https://www.quimbee.com/case-briefs-

https://fedsoc.org/commentary/videos/morissette-v-united-states-scotusbrief
Professor Josh Kleinfeld presents the case of Morissette v. United States and explains why this case goes to the very root of what criminal law is all about. Featuring: Professor Joshua Kleinfeld, Northwestern Pritzker School of the Law. *******. As always, the Federalist Society takes no position on particular legal or public policy issues

https://www.casebriefs.com/blog/law/professional-responsibility/professional-responsibility-keyed-to-hazard/conformity/arthur-andersen-llp-v-united-states/
Facts. Arthur Andersen LLP (Defendant) provided Enron Corporation with accounting services. In 2001, an article in The Wall Street Journal suggested improprieties at Enron, and the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) opened an informal investigation. Defendant formed an Enron “crisis-response†team, which included in-house

https://www.chegg.com/homework-help/questions-and-answers/bostock-v-clayton-county-case-brief-summary-law-case-explained-discuss-three-things-ve-lea-q146481506
Operations Management. Operations Management questions and answers. bostock v clayton county case brief summary law case explained Discuss three things you've learned.Discuss two things you found interesting and would like to learn more about.Ask one question you still have about the material.

https://casetext.com/case/screws-v-united-states
As stated in United States v. Cruikshank, 92 U.S. 542, 553-554, "It is no more the duty or within the power of the United States to punish for a conspiracy to falsely imprison or murder within a State, than it would be to punish for false imprisonment or murder itself." And see United States v. Fox, 95 U.S. 670, 672.

https://www.oyez.org/cases
Explore the latest cases heard by the Supreme Court of the United States, with multimedia resources and summaries of the arguments and opinions.