Search
Filter Search
People v. Langston
Court will consider constitutionality of mandatory application of life-without-parole sentences to adults convicted of “felony murder" when there is no evidence defendant acted with malice.
People v. White
Held that an open, blind, guilty plea with no agreement as to sentence did not waive a constitutional challenge to the sentence, overruling prior precedent holding otherwise
Martin v. Goodrich Corporation
Prospective application of a provision of the Worker's Occupational Disease Act creating an exception to the exclusivity of the Act for claims which would otherwise be precluded by a period of repose did not violate employer's right to due process
Johnson v. Board of Education
Held that public schools is a "public accommodation" within the meaning of the New Mexico Human Rights Act, which makes discriminatory conduct in a public accommodation unlawful, overruling prior ruling holding otherwise
A Practical Guide to Using State History to Overcome Federal Precedent
Lawyers often waive state constitutional claims by failing to make arguments that diverge from federal case law. An originalism-style approach may provide alternatives.
Valoaga v. State
Held that Department of Corrections' application of preponderance of the evidence standard, rather than clear and convincing evidence standard, in disciplinary proceedings did not violate pretrial inmate's right to due process
State v. Dodge
Held that the defendant adequately preserved, for purposes of appellate review, his argument that his second trial violated his rights against double jeopardy
Attorney General v. Hood
Held that the state’s civil rights charges against the Nationalist Social Club-131, a white nationalist and neo-Nazi organization operating in the New England area, in connection with a July 2022 incident where members displayed banners reading “KEEP NEW ENGLAND WHITE” from a highway overpass without a permit, impermissibly chilled the defendant’s constitutional right of free speech and premised on an overbroad reading of the statute
People v. Kardasz; People v. Martin
Will consider, in two cases argued together, whether mandatory lifetime sex offender registration and electronic monitoring violate the state's “cruel or unusual" punishment clause or the federal 8th Amendment, and whether lifetime electronic monitoring constitutes an unreasonable search under the state or federal constitution. With respect to the sex offender registry law, at issue is whether the court should extend its July 2024 holding in People v. Lymon that application of the registry requirement to non-sexual offenses is “cruel or unusual” punishment, to those convicted of sexual offenses as well.
Montana Environmental Information Center & Sierra Club v. Montana Department of Environmental Quality
Held that the Department of Environmental Quality appropriately considered noise impacts of a proposed project as required under the Montana Environmental Policy Act, but did not analyze lighting impacts and greenhouse gas emissions as required under the then-applicable language of the Act
