Volume 468 — United States Reports

This is a list of all United States Supreme Court cases from volume 468 of the United States Reports:

Following an accident in which he lost control of his car and collided with a pickup truck, killing a passenger in the truck, respondent was charged with four misdemeanors—reckless driving, driving… Held: The prosecution of respondent for manslaughter, following his invocation of his statutory right to appeal his misdemeanor convictions, was unconstitutional as a violation of due process. Blackledge v. Perry, 417 U.S. 21, 94 S.Ct. 2098, 40 L.Ed.2d 628.

Respondents filed an action in a Maryland state court against petitioner officers of the state college where respondents were employed, claiming employment discrimination in violation of, inter alia,… Held: While federal courts properly turn to state law for statutes of limitations in actions under the Civil Rights Acts, borrowing the limitations period from an administrative employment discrimination statute was inappropriate.

Title 18 U.S.C. § 1001 provides that "[w]hoever, in any matter within the jurisdiction of any department or agency of the United States knowingly and willfully . . . makes any false, fictitious or… Held: Both the plain language and legislative history of § 1001 establish that proof of actual knowledge of federal agency jurisdiction is not required to obtain a conviction under the statute. Pp. 68-75.

NCAA v. Board of Regents of the University of Oklahoma, 468 U.S. 85 (1984), was a landmark case in which the Supreme Court of the United States held that the National Collegiate Athletic Association (NCAA) television plan violated the Sherman and Clayton Antitrust Acts, which were designed to prohibit group actions that restrained open competition and trade.

Section 16 of the Banking Act of 1933 (Act), commonly known as the Glass-Steagall Act, prohibits commercial banks from underwriting "securities or stock," and § 21 prohibits them from… Held: Because commercial paper falls within the plain language of the Act, and because the inclusion of commercial paper within the terms of the Act is fully consistent with its purposes, commercial paper is a "security" under the Act and therefore is subject to its proscriptions. Pp. 142-160.

To avoid conflicts of interest, an order of the Florida Department of Highway Safety and Motor Vehicles (Department) required that proposed outside employment of members of the Florida Highway Patrol… Held: A plaintiff who seeks damages for violation of constitutional or statutory rights may overcome the defendant official's qualified immunity only by showing that those rights were clearly established at the time of the conduct at issue. Appellee made no such showing.

BankAmerica Corp. (BAC), a bank holding company, applied to the Federal Reserve Board (Board) for approval under § 4(c)(8) of the Bank Holding Company Act of 1956 (BHC Act) to acquire a nonbanking… Held: The Board has authority under § 4(c)(8) of the BHC Act to authorize a bank holding company to acquire a non-banking affiliate engaged principally in retail securities brokerage. Pp. 214-221.

Regan v. Wald, 468 U.S. 222 (1984), was a United States Supreme Court case in which the Court held by a 5–4 majority that restrictions upon travel to Cuba established as part of the Cuban Assets Control Regulations in 1963 did not violate the freedom to travel protected by the Due Process Clause of the Fifth Amendment.

Bacchus Imports, Ltd. v. Dias, 468 U.S. 263 (1984), was a United States Supreme Court case in which the court held that a tax on a class of goods with the purpose or effect of protecting or encouraging local business violates the Dormant Commerce Clause. The Commerce Clause forbids pure economic protectionism of resident market participants. This case was an example of the third part of the test from Complete Auto Transit, Inc. v. Brady.

Clark v. Community for Creative Non-Violence, 468 U.S. 288 (1984), is a United States Supreme Court case with the National Park Service's regulation which specifically prohibited sleeping in Lafayette Park and the National Mall at issue. The Community for Creative Non-Violence (CCNV) group had planned to hold a demonstration on the National Mall and Lafayette Park where they would erect tent cities to raise awareness of the situation of the homeless. The group obtained the correct permits for a seven-day demonstration starting on the first day of winter. The Park Service however denied the request that participants be able to sleep in the tents. The CCNV challenged this regulation on the basis that it violated their First Amendment right.

Petitioner was indicted on three counts of federal narcotics violations. Held: Petitioner raised a colorable double jeopardy claim appealable under 28 U.S.C. § 1291. While consideration of this claim would require the Court of Appeals to canvas the sufficiency of the evidence at the first trial, this fact alone does not prevent the District Court's order denying the claim from being appealable. Pp. 320-322. 2.

Petitioner, a white male, was indicted on federal fraud charges. Held: Assuming that discrimination entered into the selection of grand jury foremen, such discrimination does not warrant reversal of petitioner's conviction and dismissal of the indictment against him. Pp. 342-350.

The Public Broadcasting Act of 1967 (Act) established the Corporation for Public Broadcasting (CPB), a nonprofit">nonprofit corporation, to disburse federal funds to noncommercial television and… Held: Section 399's ban on editorializing violates the First Amendment. Pp. 374-402. (a) Congress, acting pursuant to the Commerce Clause, has power to regulate the use of the broadcast medium.

Berkemer v. McCarty, 468 U.S. 420 (1984), is a decision of the United States Supreme Court that ruled that a person in police custody following a misdemeanor traffic offense was entitled to the protections of the Fifth Amendment pursuant to the decision in Miranda v. Arizona 384 U.S. 436 (1966). Previously, some courts had been applying Miranda only to serious offenses.

Spaziano v. Florida was two United States Supreme Court cases dealing with the imposition of the death penalty. In the first case, 454 U.S. 1037 (1981), the Supreme Court, with two dissents, refused Spaziano's petition for certiorari. However, the Florida Supreme Court would reverse Spaziano's death sentence based on the judge's receipt of a confidential report which was not received by either party. On remand, the judge reimposed the death penalty and the Florida Supreme Court upheld the sentence. In the second case, 468 U.S. 447 (1984), the Court heard Spaziano's appeal of his death sentence.

Brown v. Hotel and Restaurant Employees, 468 U.S. 491 (1984), is a 4-to-3 ruling by the United States Supreme Court which held that a New Jersey state gaming law requiring union leaders to be of good moral character was not preempted by the National Labor Relations Act (NLRA).

Hudson v. Palmer, 468 U.S. 517 (1984), is a United States Supreme Court case in which the Court held that prison inmates have no privacy rights in their cells protected by the Fourth Amendment to the United States Constitution. The Court also held that an intentional deprivation of property by a state employee "does not violate the Fourteenth Amendment if an adequate postdeprivation state remedy exists," extending Parratt v. Taylor to intentional torts.

Prior to trial on a federal indictment charging petitioner with mail fraud, he was indicted, tried, and convicted of the unrelated federal offense of knowingly and willfully making false… Held: After retrial and conviction following a defendant's successful appeal, a sentencing authority may justify an increased sentence by affirmatively identifying relevant conduct or events that occurred subsequent to the original sentencing proceedings. Pp. 563-565, 569-571, 571-572.

Block v. Rutherford, 468 U.S. 576 (1984), was a United States Supreme Court case in which the court held that a ban on contact visits for pretrial detainees is not unconstitutional. A contact visit is one without a barrier between the detainee and their guest. Subsequent state courts interpreting state law have held that contact visits are rights.

Roberts v. United States Jaycees, 468 U.S. 609 (1984), was a decision of the Supreme Court of the United States overturning the United States Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit's application of a Minnesota antidiscrimination law. The case established what was at the time the prevailing framework for analyzing claims of associative freedom, holding that the Minneapolis branch of the United States Jaycees could not bar women from becoming voting members.

Title 18 U.S.C. § 474 makes it a crime to photograph any obligation or other security of the United States. Held: The judgment is affirmed in part and reversed in part. 539 F.Supp. 1371 (1982), affirmed in part and reversed in part.

United States v. Karo, 468 U.S. 705 (1984), was a United States Supreme Court decision related to the Fourth Amendment protection from unreasonable search and seizure. It held that use of an electronic beeper device to monitor a can of ether without a warrant constituted an unlawful search. However, the Court upheld the conviction of Karo and his accomplices, stating that the warrant affidavit contained enough information not derived from the unlawful use of the beeper to provide sufficient basis for probable cause.

Allen v. Wright, 468 U.S. 737 (1984), was a United States Supreme Court case that determined that citizens do not have standing to sue a federal government agency based on the influence that the agency's determinations might have on third parties.

Held: absent exigent' circumstances, the entry may have constituted an illegal search, or interference with petitioners’ privacy interests, requiring suppression of all evidence observed during the entry.

Section § 12(f) to the Military Selective Service Act denies federal financial assistance under Title IV of the Higher Education Act of 1965 to male students between the ages of 18 and 26 who fail to… Held: Section 1113 is not a bill of attainder. Pp. 846-856. (a) A bill of attainder is "a law that legislatively determines guilt and inflicts punishment upon an identifiable individual without provision of the protections of a judicial trial." Nixon v.

Respondents' 8-year-old daughter was born with a defect known as spina bifida. Held: CIC is a "related service" under the Education of the Handicapped Act. Pp. 888-895. (a) CIC services qualify as a "supportive servic[e] . . . required to assist a handicapped child to benefit from special education," within the meaning of the Act.

United States v. Leon, 468 U.S. 897 (1984), was a United States Supreme Court case in which the Court established the "good faith" exception to the Fourth Amendment exclusionary rule.

Held: that the search was lawful and authorized by the warrant issued by the judge,” 387 Mass., at 503 , 441 N. E. 2d, at 733 , the evidence had to be excluded because this Court had not recognized a good-faith exception to the exclusionary rule.

Held: 1. Petitioners were not entitled to attorney's fees under § 1988. Pp. 1006-1016. Held: Petitioners were not entitled to attorney's fees under § 1988. Pp. 1006-1016.

Respondent Mexican citizens were ordered deported by an Immigration Judge. Held: A deportation proceeding is a purely civil action to determine a person's eligibility to remain in this country. The purpose of deportation is not to punish past transgressions but rather to put an end to a continuing violation of the immigration laws.

Held: as I read its opinion, that litigants who seek to challenge the exercise of jurisdiction by an Indian tribal court in a civil action have no federal-court remedy of any kind.