fbpx
Wikipedia

Johnson v. United States (2000)

Johnson v. United States, 529 U.S. 694 (2000), was a United States Supreme Court case in which the rights of those serving federal probation and supervised release were more clearly defined. The court ruled that "Although such violations often lead to reimprisonment, the violative conduct need not be criminal and need only be found by a judge under a preponderance of the evidence standard, not by a jury beyond a reasonable doubt."[1][2]

Johnson v. United States
Argued February 22, 2000
Decided May 15, 2000
Full case nameCornell Johnson v. United States
Citations529 U.S. 694 (more)
120 S. Ct. 1795; 146 L. Ed. 2d 727; 2000 U.S. LEXIS 3135; 68 U.S.L.W. 4378; 2000 Cal. Daily Op. Service 3775; 2000 Daily Journal DAR 5043; 2000 Colo. J. C.A.R. 2679; 13 Fla. L. Weekly Fed. S 308
Court membership
Chief Justice
William Rehnquist
Associate Justices
John P. Stevens · Sandra Day O'Connor
Antonin Scalia · Anthony Kennedy
David Souter · Clarence Thomas
Ruth Bader Ginsburg · Stephen Breyer
Case opinions
MajoritySouter, joined by Rehnquist, Stevens, O'Connor, Ginsburg, Breyer; Kennedy (in part)
ConcurrenceKennedy (in part)
ConcurrenceThomas
DissentScalia

An earlier case of the same name, 333 U.S. 10 (1948), held that a search warrant is always required unless there are exceptional circumstances.[3]

References edit

  1. ^ Johnson v. United States, 529 U.S. 694, 700 (2000).
  2. ^ (PDF). Archived from the original (PDF) on June 8, 2010. Retrieved July 19, 2010.{{cite web}}: CS1 maint: archived copy as title (link)
  3. ^ Johnson v. United States, 333 U.S. 10 (1948).

johnson, united, states, 2000, confused, with, united, states, johnson, 2000, johnson, united, states, 2000, united, states, supreme, court, case, which, rights, those, serving, federal, probation, supervised, release, were, more, clearly, defined, court, rule. Not to be confused with United States v Johnson 2000 Johnson v United States 529 U S 694 2000 was a United States Supreme Court case in which the rights of those serving federal probation and supervised release were more clearly defined The court ruled that Although such violations often lead to reimprisonment the violative conduct need not be criminal and need only be found by a judge under a preponderance of the evidence standard not by a jury beyond a reasonable doubt 1 2 Johnson v United StatesSupreme Court of the United StatesArgued February 22 2000Decided May 15 2000Full case nameCornell Johnson v United StatesCitations529 U S 694 more 120 S Ct 1795 146 L Ed 2d 727 2000 U S LEXIS 3135 68 U S L W 4378 2000 Cal Daily Op Service 3775 2000 Daily Journal DAR 5043 2000 Colo J C A R 2679 13 Fla L Weekly Fed S 308Court membershipChief Justice William Rehnquist Associate Justices John P Stevens Sandra Day O ConnorAntonin Scalia Anthony KennedyDavid Souter Clarence ThomasRuth Bader Ginsburg Stephen BreyerCase opinionsMajoritySouter joined by Rehnquist Stevens O Connor Ginsburg Breyer Kennedy in part ConcurrenceKennedy in part ConcurrenceThomasDissentScalia An earlier case of the same name 333 U S 10 1948 held that a search warrant is always required unless there are exceptional circumstances 3 References edit Johnson v United States 529 U S 694 700 2000 Archived copy PDF Archived from the original PDF on June 8 2010 Retrieved July 19 2010 a href Template Cite web html title Template Cite web cite web a CS1 maint archived copy as title link Johnson v United States 333 U S 10 1948 Retrieved from https en wikipedia org w index php title Johnson v United States 2000 amp oldid 1175144312, wikipedia, wiki, book, books, library,

article

, read, download, free, free download, mp3, video, mp4, 3gp, jpg, jpeg, gif, png, picture, music, song, movie, book, game, games.