Volume 412 — United States Reports

This is a list of all the United States Supreme Court cases from volume 412 of the United States Reports:

Upon retrial following the reversal of his conviction, petitioner was again found guilty and sentenced by the jury to a greater term than had been imposed by the first jury. Held: The rendition of a higher sentence by a jury upon retrial does not violate the Double Jeopardy Clause, North Carolina v.

Held: "must play no part in the sentence [a defendant] receives after a new trial." Id., at 725 . In so holding, the Court recognized that "fundamental notions of fairness embodied within the concept of due process" absolutely preclude the imposition of sentences based upon such a " `retaliatory motivation.' " Chaffin v. Stynchcombe, ante, at 25.

The adjudication by the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) under § 8(b)(1) (A) of the National Labor Relations Act of an unfair labor practice allegedly committed by a union does not include authority to determine whether the amount of a disciplinary fine levied by the union against a member is reasonable, the issue being one of internal union affairs over which the NLRB exercises no jurisdiction. Pp. 71—78. 148 U.S.App.D.C. 119, 459 F.2d 1143, reversed.

The Democratic National Committee requested a declaratory ruling from the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) that the Communications Act or the First Amendment precluded a licensee from having a… Held: Neither the Communications Act nor the First Amendment requires broadcasters to accept paid editorial advertisements. Pp. 101—114, 121—170. 146 U.S.App.D.C. 181, 450 F.2d 642, reversed.

Petitioner, in Indian, was convicted of assault with intent to commit serious bodily injury on an Indian reservation, a federal crime under the Major Crimes Act of 1885, after the court refused to… Held: An Indian prosecuted in federal court under the Act is entitled to a jury instruction on lesser included offenses, if the facts warrant.

Schneckloth v. Bustamonte, 412 U.S. 218 (1973), was a U.S. Supreme Court case that ruled that in a case involving a consent search, although knowledge of a right to refuse consent is a factor in determining whether a grant of consent to a search was voluntary, the state does not need to prove that the person who granted consent to search knew of the right to refuse consent under the Fourth Amendment.

Cupp v. Murphy, 412 U.S. 291 (1973), was a United States Supreme Court case in which the Court upheld a murder conviction notwithstanding a challenge that the evidence upon which guilt was based was obtained in violation of the Fourth and Fourteenth Amendments of the United States Constitution. The court held that in view of the station-house detention upon probable cause, the very limited intrusion of scraping the defendant's fingernails for blood and other material, undertaken to preserve highly evanescent evidence, did not violate the Fourth and Fourteenth Amendments. Justice Stewart wrote for the majority.

Petitioners, parents of District of Columbia (D.C.) school children, brought this action seeking damages and declaratory and injunctive relief for invasion of privacy that… Held: The congressional committee members, members of their staff, the consultant, and the investigator are absolutely immune under the Speech or Debate Clause insofar as they engaged in the legislative acts of compiling the report referring it to the House, or voting for its publication. Pp. 311—313. 2.

Respondent was convicted of violating 26 U.S.C. § 7206(1), which makes it a felony when one '(w)illfully makes and subscribes any return .… Held: The word 'willfully' has the same meaning in §§ 7206(1) and 7207, connoting the voluntary, intentional violation of a known legal duty, and the distinction between the statutes is found in the additional misconduct that is essential to the violation of the felony provision; hence, the District Court properly refused the requested…

The United States brought this action contesting the validity of appellee Tax Commission's regulation requiring out-of-state liquor… Held: The twenty-first Amendment does not empower a State to tax or otherwise regulate the importation of distilled spirits into a terriory over which the United States exercises exclusive jurisdiction, Collins v. Yosemite Park & Curry Co., 304 U.S. 518, 58 S.Ct. 1009, 82 L.Ed. 1502, regardless of whether some of the liquor may have been…

The United States did not breach its fiduciary duty as trustee of Indian property by paying the Oklahoma inheritance tax assessed against the estate of decedent, a restricted Osage Indian, in reliance on West v. Oklahoma Tax Comm'n, 334 U.S. 717, 68 S.Ct. 1223, 92 L.Ed. 1676, which had upheld the validity of that tax as applied to the same kind of estate. Pp. 394—400. 198 Ct.Cl. 599, 461 F.2d 1364, reversed. Sol. Gen. Erwin N. Griswold, for the United States.

In this refund suit, respondent railroad seeks to recover an alleged income tax overpayment resulting from its failure to take deductions for depreciation with respect to the cost of facilities… Held: The governmental subsidies did not constitute contributions to respondent's capital within the meaning of § 113(a) (8); the assets in question have a zero basis; and respondent cannot claim a depreciation allowance with respect to those assets.

Petitioner was convicted of a federal offense and was sentenced to a term of five years, to run concurrently with a sentence of one to three years that he was serving pursuant to a state-court… Held: In this case, the only question for review is the propriety of the remedy fashioned by the Court of Appeals. In light of the policies underlying the right to a speedy trial, dismissal must remain, as noted in Barker v.

Connecticut requires nonresidents enrolled in the state university system to pay tuition and other fees at higher rates than state… Held: The Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment does not permit Connecticut to deny an individual the opportunity to present evidence that he is a bona fide resident entitled to in-state rates, on the basis of a permanent and irrebuttable presumption of nonresidence, when that presumption is not necessarily or universally true in…

At petitioner's criminal trial, a witness' alibi evidence was struck as a sanction for petitioner's failure to file a notice of alibi in accordance with Oregon's statutory requirement, and petitioner… Held: Reciprocal discovery is required by fundamental fairness and it is insufficient that although the statute does not require it, the State might grant reciprocal discovery in a given case.

Mattz v. Arnett was a United States Supreme Court case in which the Court held that the land that had been the Klamath River Reservation and was incorporated into the Hoopa Valley Reservation in 1891 remained Indian country within the meaning of 18 U.S.C. §1151 despite the Act of June 17, 1892. The holding required California game wardens to return of five gill nets because the land was within the reservation boundaries and California lacked jurisdiction to enforce California law that interfered with rights reserved by the Yurok Tribe.

Appellees, who apparently because of alleged nude dancing at their retail liquor establishments were denied renewal of their one-year… Held: A city is not a 'person' under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 where equitable relief is sought, any more than it is where damages are sought, Monroe v. Pape, 365 U.S. 167, 187, 81 S.Ct. 473, 484, 5 L.Ed.2d 492, and the District Court, therefore, erred in concluding that it had jurisdiction over the complaints under 28 U.S.C. § 1343(3) since only…

Petitioners, claiming that their son's suicide while he was confined as a federal prisoner in a county jail was proximately caused by… Held: The Court of Appeals correctly concluded that, contrary to petitioners' contention, the deputy marshal had no authority to control the activities of the sheriff's employees and that the jail was a 'contractor,' not a 'Federal agency,' within the meaning of the Act; and the statutory authorization for the housing of federal prisoners…

Goldstein v. California, 412 U.S. 546 (1973), was a United States Supreme Court case in which the high court ruled that California's state statutes criminalizing record piracy did not violate the Copyright Clause of the United States Constitution.

Pursuant to the Migratory Bird Conservation Act, the United States acquired land parcels in Louisiana for a wildlife refuge, one by deed in 1937, the other by condemnation in 1939. Held: Under settled principles governing the choice of law by federal courts, Louisiana's Act 315 of 1940 does not apply to the mineral reservations agreed to by the parties in 1937 and 1939. Pp. 590 593.

The Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act of 1938, as amended in 1962, establishes a system of premarketing clearance for drugs and… Held: The 1962 amendments and the regulations issued thereunder, which express well-established principles of scientific investigation, in their reduction of the 'substantial evidence' standard to detailed guidelines for the protection of the public, make FDA's so-called administrative summary judgment procedure appropriate. Pp. 617—619. 2.

Petitioner manufactures a drug called Ritonic Capsules, for which it filed a new drug application (NDA) that became effective in 1959, on the basis of the drug's safety. Held: FDA has jurisdiction in an administrative proceeding to determine whether a drug produce is a 'new drug' within the meaning of § 201(p) of the Act. Weinberger v. Bentex Pharmaceuticals Inc., 412 U.S. 645, 93 S.Ct. 2488, 37 L.Ed.2d 235. Pp. 644—644. 2.

Respondent drug marketers filed suit for a declaratory judgment that their drugs containing pentylenetetrazol are generally recognized as safe and effective and thus are not 'new drugs' within the… Held: The District Court's referral of the 'new drug' and 'grandfather' issues to FDA was proper. Pp. 649 654.

Petitioner sells drug products containing citrus bioflavonoid, an extract from fruit skins, as a principal active ingredient. Held: 'Any drug' is used in § 107(c)(4) in the generic sense, which means that the 'me-too's' whether the products of the same or of different manufacturers 'covered' by an 'effective' NDA are not exempt from the efficacy requirement of § 201(p). Pp. 663—665. 2.

United States v. Students Challenging Regulatory Agency Procedures (SCRAP), 412 U.S. 669 (1973), was a landmark decision of the United States Supreme Court in which the Court held that the members of SCRAP—five law students from the George Washington University Law School—had standing to sue under Article III of the Constitution to challenge a nationwide railroad freight rate increase approved by the Interstate Commerce Commission (ICC). SCRAP was the first full-court consideration of the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA). The Court also reversed the lower court decision that an injunction should be issued at the suspension stage of the ICC rate proceeding. The standing decision has retained its place as the high mark in the Court's standing jurisprudence.

Gaffney v. Cummings, 412 U.S. 735 (1973), is a Supreme Court decision upholding statewide legislative apportionment plans for Connecticut. The Court admitted that these plans entailed "substantial inequalities in the population of the representative districts." It observed that "the States have made virtually no attempt to justify their failure 'to construct districts ... as nearly of equal population as is practicable." It was a Fourteenth Amendment case. At issue was whether the election districts had been gerrymandered in violation of the Fourteenth Amendment to the Constitution.

In this litigation challenging the Texas 1970 legislative reapportionment scheme, a three-judge District Court held that the House plan, statewide, contained constitutionally… Held: This Court has jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1253 to consider the appeal from the injunction over applicable to the Bexar County and Dallas County districting, since the three-judge court had been properly convened, and this Court can review the declaratory part of the judgment below. Roe v.

Texas enacted Senate Bill One (S.B. 1) providing for congressional redistricting. Held: Although the percentage deviations in S.B. 1 are smaller than those invalidated in Kirkpatrick v. Preisler, 394 U.S. 526, 89 S.Ct. 1225, 22 L.Ed.2d 519, and Wells v. Rockefeller, 394 U.S. 542, 89 S.Ct. 1234, 22 L.Ed.2d 535, they were not 'unavoidable' and the districts were not as mathematically equal as reasonably possible.

The Interstate Commerce Commission (ICC), after hearings, approved imposition by appellant railroads of separate charges for inspection of grain while in transit, a service that had previously been… Held: The action of the District Court is affirmed as to the remand to the ICC and is reversed as to the injunction suspending the proposed charges. P. 2374—2384. D.C. 352 F.Supp. 365, affirmed in part and reversed in part.

Held: however, that where there is a “rational connection” between the facts proved and the fact presumed or inferred, it is permissible to shift the burden of going forward to the defendant.