State Case Database
Search State Court Report's database of significant state supreme court decisions and pending cases. Download decisions and briefs for cases that develop state constitutional law. This is a selected database and does not include every state supreme court case. See methodology and "How to Use the State Case Database" for more information.
This database is updated monthly, although individual cases may be updated more frequently. Last updated comprehensively with cases decided through June 2025.
Featured Cases
Hoke County Board of Education v. State of North Carolina
The North Carolina Supreme Court overturned its own precedent and put an end to more than 30 years of litigation involving the funding of public education in the state.
Commonwealth v. Lee
The Pennsylvania Supreme Court held that mandating a life sentence, without the possibility of parole, for “felony murder” — a legal doctrine that allows someone to be prosecuted for murder for any death that occurs during the commission of a separate felony, even if the defendant never meant to kill anyone — violates the Pennsylvania Constitution’s ban on “cruel” punishments
Luther v. Hoskins
The Missouri Supreme Court rejected voters' challenge to Missouri's new congressional district map, which the plaintiffs said ran afoul of state constitutional prohibitions on mid-decade redistricting. The court said the state constitution contained no express prohibition on mid-decade redistricting and that the map was a "valid exercise" of the "plenary legislative power to establish congressional districts."
State ex rel. Dudley v. Yost
Ohio Supreme Court granted limited writ of mandamus ordering attorney general to examine the summary of an initiative petition related to automatic voter registration and other voting processes and, if the summary is a fair and truthful statement of the proposed amendment, certify and advance the petition
State v. Thompson
Ruled that state constitutional and statutory provisions required a concurrence of only ten jurors for acquittal for offenses committed before January 1, 2019
People v. Loew
Held that a presiding judge’s ex parte communications to the prosecutor did not violate defendant's constitutional rights
Tatum v. Commissioner of Corrections
Held that a new constitutional rule of criminal procedure applies retroactively under certain conditions and principles regarding the admissibility of eyewitness identification evidence apply retroactively
State v. Diole
Held that subjecting incompetent defendants to a determination of whether they committed the acts charged without a jury trial, the protections of medical privilege, and the safeguards of the rules of evidence did not violate due process and equal protection
Planned Parenthood of Montana v. State of Montana (Planned Parenthood 2)
Ruled that minors have a fundamental right to privacy and do not have to seek parental permission to get an abortion in the state.
Lake v. Hobbs
Arizona Court of Appeals affirmed lower court’s dismissal of claims made by Kari Lake seeking to overturn the 2022 gubernatorial election, which she lost, based on alleged election administration errors. The Arizona Supreme Court denied her petition for review.
Watson Memorial Spiritual Temple of Christ v. Korban
Ruled that mandamus was an appropriate vehicle for landowners to collect from the city's sewerage and water board inverse-condemnation damages awarded in prior suit
State v. Hoyle
Wisconsin Supreme Court reversed Court of Appeals's grant of new trial, finding that prosecutor did not unlawfully comment on defendant's exercise of his Fifth Amendment right to remain silent. On remand, Court of Appeals rejected defendant's other bases for overturning his conviction, finding no reasonable probability that newly discovered evidence would have changed the jury's verdict and evidence the prosecution did not disclose to be immaterial. The Wisconsin high court denied defendant's subsequent petition for review.
Williams v. Powell
Held that statutes criminalizing acts likely to prevent or disrupt the General Assembly and criminalizing intentionally disruptive or disorderly conduct at state capital were neither facially overbroad nor facially vague
