Search
Filter Search
State v. VanBeek
Ruled that an officer taking an individual's driver's license back to the officer's squad car may constitute a seizure for purposes of constitutional protection against unreasonable searches and seizures
State v. Sewell
Ruled that arrestee has no right to consult counsel when deciding whether to consent to chemical testing because the right does not attach before a prosecution is commenced
People v. Schneider
Dissent wrote that jurisdiction to issue eavesdropping warrants should be constrained by clause regarding telephone intercepts in light of state's fundamental distrust of the use of wiretapping
In re M.M.
Ruled that statute eliminating review of final orders in superior court and instead directed appeals in the supreme court, may be applied to pending case without violating prohibition on retrospective laws
Commonwealth v. Delgado-Rivera
Ruled that a defendant does not have a reasonable expectation of privacy in sent text messages that were acquired from codefendant's cell phone
Missorui National Education Association v. Missouri Department of Labor & Industrial Relations
Ruled that exemption of public safety labor organizations from statutory scheme altering public labor relations lacks a rational basis and violates equal protection clause
Texas Supreme Court Rejects Call to Clarify Exception to Abortion Ban
Plaintiffs who suffered severe physical and emotional harm after being denied abortions claimed the medical exceptions to the ban are unclear and unconstitutional.
Fourth Amendment Lags Behind State Search and Seizure Provisions
State courts have long provided more search and seizure protections than the U.S. Supreme Court — and they sometimes influence federal law.
Center For Reproductive Rights Litigation Director Discusses the High Stakes of Abortion Litigation
State Court Report spoke with counsel for the plaintiffs challenging Texas’s strict abortion ban — which the state supreme court just ruled was constitutional.
Watson v. State
Ruled statue requiring minors accused of non-felony traffic offenses to be charged as an adult rather than in juvenile court does not violate constitution’s equal protection clause
