Volume 471 — United States Reports

Tennessee v. Garner, 471 U.S. 1 (1985), is a civil case in which the Supreme Court of the United States held that, under the Fourth Amendment, when a law enforcement officer is pursuing a fleeing suspect, the officer may not use deadly force to prevent escape unless "the officer has probable cause to believe that the suspect poses a significant threat of death or serious physical injury to the officer or others."

Petitioners, unincorporated townships located in Wisconsin adjacent to respondent city, filed suit against respondent in Federal District Court,… Held: Respondent's anticompetitive activities are protected by the state action exemption to the federal antitrust laws. Pp. 38-47. (a) Before a municipality may claim the protection of the state action exemption, it must demonstrate that it is engaging in the challenged activity pursuant to a "clearly articulated" state policy.

Petitioner Southern Motor Carriers Rate Conference and petitioner North Carolina Motor Carriers Association (petitioners), "rate bureaus"… Held: Petitioners' collective ratemaking activities, although not compelled by the respective States, are immune from federal antitrust liability under the state action doctrine. The Midcal test should be used to determine whether the private rate bureaus' collective ratemaking activities are protected under the federal antitrust laws.

Board of Trustees of Scarsdale v. McCreary, 471 U.S. 83 (1985), was a United States Supreme Court case in which an evenly split Court upheld per curiam a lower court's decision that the display of a privately sponsored nativity scene on public property does not violate the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment.

Section 314 of the Federal Land Policy and Management Act of 1976 (FLPMA) establishes a federal recording system that is designed to rid federal lands of stale mining claims and to provide federal… Held: Section 314(a)'s plain language—"prior to December 31" read in conjunction with BLM regulations makes clear that the annual filings must be made on or before December 30. Thus, the BLM did not act ultra vires in concluding that appellees' filing was untimely. Pp. 97-100. 2.

United States v. James Miller, 471 U.S. 130 (1985) was a Supreme Court case in which the court held that the Fifth Amendment's Grand Jury Clause is not violated if a federal defendant is found guilty by a trial jury without having found "all" parts of an indictment proved. This case partly overruled Ex parte Bain, 121 U.S. 1 (1887), in that a grand jury's indictment is not "final", and its scope for conviction may be narrowed by the prosecution during trial. This case allows for prosecutors to simply prove a defendant committed criminal acts at least mentioned in an indictment, but need not prove all the allegations in their entirety.

(hereafter respondents) filed a request with the CIA under the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA), seeking, inter alia, the names of the institutions and individuals… Held: Section 102(d)(3) qualifies as a withholding statute under Exemption 3. Section 102(d)(3) clearly refers to "particular types of matters" within the meaning of Exemption 3. Moreover, the FOIA's legislative history confirms that Congress intended § 102(d)(3) to be a withholding statute under that Exemption.

Kerr-McGee v. Navajo Tribe, 471 U.S. 195 (1985), was a case in which the Supreme Court of the United States held that an Indian tribe is not required to obtain the approval of the Secretary of the Interior in order to impose taxes on non-tribal persons or entities doing business on a reservation.

The bad-faith handling of an insurance claim, including a claim under a disability insurance plan included in a collective-bargaining agreement, is a tort under Wisconsin law. Held: When resolution of a state-law claim is substantially dependent upon analysis of the terms of a collective-bargaining agreement, that claim must either be treated as a § 301 claim or dismissed as pre-empted by federal labor-contract law.

Hunter v. Underwood, 471 U.S. 222 (1985), was a case in which the Supreme Court of the United States unanimously invalidated the criminal disenfranchisement provision of § 182 of the Alabama Constitution as a violation of the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution.

After respondent Board of Education of Dyer County, Tennessee, terminated petitioner's employment as a schoolteacher in 1974, he retained counsel to represent him in administrative proceedings before… Held: Petitioner is not entitled to a fee award for counsel's services during the Board hearings on the theory that they were "proceeding[s] to enforce" § 1983 within the meaning of § 1988.

Held: so far as the same is not inconsistent with the Constitution and laws of the United States, shall be extended to and govern the said courts in the trial and disposition of the cause . . . .” Johnson v. Railway Express Agency, Inc., 421 U. S. 454, 462 (1975). Board of Regents v. Tomanio, 446 U. S. 478, 488 (1980).

Held: “it would be difficult to conclude that the extensive commercial enterprise operated and controlled by the foundation was nothing but a religious liturgy engaged in bringing good news to a pagan world. By entering the economic arena and trafficking in the marketplace, the foundation has subjected itself to the standards Congress has prescribed for the benefit of employees.

Francis v. Franklin, 471 U.S. 307 (1985), is a United States Supreme Court decision reaffirming due process principles elucidated in Sandstrom v. Montana, that the prosecution bears the burden of proof of establishing the mental element of intent. Justice Brennan wrote that under the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment, a jury instruction saying that "a person of sound mind is presumed to intend the natural and probable consequences of his acts, but the presumption may be rebutted" is unconstitutional, because the burden of proof is shifted from the prosecution to the defense.

Petitioner filed a complaint in Federal District Court alleging violations of the Commodity Exchange Act by Chicago Discount Commodity Brokers (CDCB), and respondent Frank McGhee, acting as sole… Held: The trustee of a corporation in bankruptcy has the power to waive the corporation's attorney-client privilege with respect to prebankruptcy communications. Pp. 348-358.

The Education of the Handicapped Act requires participating state and local educational agencies to assure that handicapped children and their parents are guaranteed… Held: The grant of authority to a reviewing court under § 1415(e)(2) includes the power to order school authorities to reimburse parents for their expenditures on private special education for a child if the court ultimately determines that such placement, rather than a proposed IEP, is proper under the Act.

California v. Carney, 471 U.S. 386 (1985), was a United States Supreme Court case which held that a motor home was subject to the automobile exception to the search warrant requirement of the Fourth Amendment to the United States Constitution because the motor home was readily movable.

At respondent's Tennessee state-court trial for murder, the State relied on a confession that respondent made to the Sheriff. Held: Respondent's rights under the Confrontation Clause of the Sixth Amendment were not violated by the introduction of the accomplice's confession for rebuttal purposes. Pp. 413-417.

The federal statute governing food stamp fraud provides in 7 U.S.C. § 2024(b)(1) that "whoever knowingly uses, transfers, acquires, alters, or possesses coupons… Held: Absent any indication of a contrary purpose in the statute's language or legislative history, the Government in a prosecution for violation of § 2024(b)(1) must prove that the defendant knew that his acquisition or possession of food stamps was in a manner unauthorized by statute or regulations. Pp. 423-434.

Section 244(a)(1) of the Immigration and Nationality Act allows the Attorney General to suspend an alien's deportation if the alien has been present in the United States for a continuous period of at… Held: The refusal to reopen the suspension proceeding was within the Attorney General's discretion.

Burger King v. Rudzewicz, 471 U.S. 462 (1985), is a notable case in United States civil procedure that came before the Supreme Court of the United States addressing personal jurisdiction.

Respondent, a Massachusetts prison inmate, as a result of a fight that occurred in a prison office, was charged with violation of prison regulations. Held: The Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment does not require that prison officials' reasons for denying an inmate's witness request appear in the administrative record of the disciplinary hearing.

The Medicaid Act does not cover services performed for patients between the ages of 21 and 65 in an "institution for mental diseases" (IMD). Held: An ICF may be an IMD, and the terms are not mutually exclusive. The Act's express authorization for coverage of services performed for individuals 65 or over uses language that plainly indicates that a hospital, a skilled nursing facility, or an ICF may be an IMD.

Harper & Row v. Nation Enterprises, 471 U.S. 539 (1985), was a United States Supreme Court decision in which public interest in learning about a historical figure's impressions of a historic event was held not to be sufficient to show fair use of material otherwise protected by copyright. Defendant, The Nation, had summarized and quoted substantially from A Time to Heal, President Gerald Ford's forthcoming memoir of his decision to pardon former president Richard Nixon. When Harper & Row, who held the rights to A Time to Heal, brought suit, The Nation asserted that its use of the book was protected under the doctrine of fair use, because of the great public interest in a historical figure's account of a historic incident.

Respondent, upon pleading guilty in a Missouri state court to controlled substance offenses, was put on probation and given suspended prison sentences. Held: The Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment does not generally require a sentencing court to indicate that it has considered alternatives to incarceration before revoking probation.

Zauderer v. Office of Disciplinary Counsel of Supreme Court of Ohio, 471 U.S. 626 (1985), was a United States Supreme Court case in which the Court held that states can require an advertiser to disclose certain information without violating the advertiser's First Amendment free speech protections as long as the disclosure requirements are reasonably related to the State's interest in preventing deception of consumers.

Respondents father and sons, who owned all of the common stock of a lumber business that they operated, offered their stock for sale through brokers. Held: The stock at issue here is a "security" within the definition of the Acts, United Housing Foundation, Inc. v. Forman, 421 U.S. 837, 95 S.Ct. 2051, 44 L.Ed.2d 621, distinguished, and the "sale of business" doctrine does not apply. Pp. 685-697.

Respondent Ruefenacht (hereinafter respondent) purchased 50% of the stock of a company whose president previously had owned all of the stock. Held: The stock purchased by respondent is a "security" within the meaning of the Acts, and the "sale of business" doctrine does not apply. Landreth Timber Co. v. Landreth, 471 U.S. 681, 105 S.Ct. 2297, 85 L.Ed.2d 692. Pp. 704-706.

In 1980, appellant Hillsborough County adopted ordinances and promulgated implementing regulations governing blood plasma centers within the county. Held: Appellant county's ordinances and implementing regulations are not pre-empted by the federal regulations. Pp. 712-723. (a) No intent to pre-empt may be inferred from the comprehensiveness of the federal regulations.

contends that § 47B, as applied to insurance policies purchased by employee health-care plans regulated by the federal Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974 (ERISA), is pre-empted by that… Held: Section 47B, as applied, is a law "which regulates insurance" within the meaning of § 514(b)(2)(A), and therefore is not pre-empted by § 514(a) as it applies to insurance contracts purchased for plans subject to ERISA.

Montana v. Blackfeet Tribe of Indians, 471 U.S. 759 (1985), was a United States Supreme Court case in which the Court held that States cannot tax tribes without express Congressional approval. The canons of construction for interpreting treaties between the United States and tribes apply to the interpretation of federal statutes.

In March 1981, petitioner was charged in a multicount indictment in the Western District of Washington for his role in the off-loading and landing of marihuana from a "mother ship" at a Washington… Held: The language, structure, and legislative history of the Comprehensive Drug Abuse Prevention and Control Act of 1970 show that Congress intended the CCE offense to be a separate offense that is punishable in addition to, and not as a substitute for, the predicate offenses.

An officer on petitioner city's police force shot and killed respondent's husband outside a bar in which a robbery had been reported in progress. Held: The judgment is reversed. 728 F.2d 456 (CA 10 1984), reversed.

National Farmers Union Insurance Cos. v. Crow Tribe, 471 U.S. 845 (1985), was a United States Supreme Court case in which the Court held that tribal court remedies must be exhausted before tribal court jurisdiction can be challenged in federal court.

Title 18 U.S.C. § 844(i) makes it a crime to maliciously damage or destroy, or attempt to damage or destroy, by means of fire or an explosive, "any building . . . used . . . in any activity affecting… Held: Section 844(i) applies to petitioner's apartment building.

Glass v. Louisiana, 471 U.S. 1080 (1985), was a case denied for hearing by the United States Supreme Court in 1985. The case is famous for Justice Brennan's dissent from the denial of certiorari, joined by Justice Marshall, arguing that the death penalty is always unconstitutional.