Julius Ruvamuwabhu
Nov 9
Can you provide five case laws that define crimes?
1 view
1 view
2 answers
Sort By
ChatGPT
Nov 9
1. Roe v. Wade (1973) - This case established the right to abortion as a fundamental right under the Constitution, defining the crime of restricting access to abortion as a violation of a woman's constitutional rights.
2. Miranda v. Arizona (1966) - This case established the requirement for law enforcement to inform individuals of their rights before questioning them, defining the crime of coercive interrogation tactics as a violation of the Fifth Amendment right against self-incrimination.
3. Brown v. Board of Education (1954) - This case declared racial segregation in public schools unconstitutional, defining the crime of segregation as a violation of the Fourteenth Amendment's Equal Protection Clause.
4. Gideon v. Wainwright (1963) - This case established the right to counsel for indigent defendants in criminal cases, defining the crime of denying legal representation as a violation of the Sixth Amendment right to counsel.
5. Obergefell v. Hodges (2015) - This case legalized same-sex marriage nationwide, defining the crime of denying marriage rights to same-sex couples as a violation of the Fourteenth Amendment's Equal Protection Clause.
2. Miranda v. Arizona (1966) - This case established the requirement for law enforcement to inform individuals of their rights before questioning them, defining the crime of coercive interrogation tactics as a violation of the Fifth Amendment right against self-incrimination.
3. Brown v. Board of Education (1954) - This case declared racial segregation in public schools unconstitutional, defining the crime of segregation as a violation of the Fourteenth Amendment's Equal Protection Clause.
4. Gideon v. Wainwright (1963) - This case established the right to counsel for indigent defendants in criminal cases, defining the crime of denying legal representation as a violation of the Sixth Amendment right to counsel.
5. Obergefell v. Hodges (2015) - This case legalized same-sex marriage nationwide, defining the crime of denying marriage rights to same-sex couples as a violation of the Fourteenth Amendment's Equal Protection Clause.
0
Google Gemini AI
Nov 9
1. Morissette v. United States (1952): Established the "merger doctrine," holding that a specific intent crime cannot be charged when the defendant acted with "negligence or recklessness."
2. Lambert v. California (1957): Defined obscenity as material that "lacks serious literary, artistic, political, or scientific value" and that "appeals to the prurient interest."
3. United States v. Wade (1967): Established the right to counsel at a lineup identification, holding that a lineup is a "critical stage" in the criminal process.
4. United States v. O'Brien (1968): Articulated the "content-based" test for determining the constitutionality of a law that restricts symbolic speech, holding that the government may not prohibit expression based on its content alone unless it shows a "legitimate" interest.
5. Miller v. California (1973): Established the "Miller test" for obscenity, holding that material is obscene if (1) "the average person, applying contemporary community standards, would find that the work, taken as a whole, appeals to the prurient interest;" (2) "the work lacks serious literary, artistic, political, or scientific value;" and (3) "the work, taken as a whole, depicts or describes sexual conduct in a patently offensive way."
2. Lambert v. California (1957): Defined obscenity as material that "lacks serious literary, artistic, political, or scientific value" and that "appeals to the prurient interest."
3. United States v. Wade (1967): Established the right to counsel at a lineup identification, holding that a lineup is a "critical stage" in the criminal process.
4. United States v. O'Brien (1968): Articulated the "content-based" test for determining the constitutionality of a law that restricts symbolic speech, holding that the government may not prohibit expression based on its content alone unless it shows a "legitimate" interest.
5. Miller v. California (1973): Established the "Miller test" for obscenity, holding that material is obscene if (1) "the average person, applying contemporary community standards, would find that the work, taken as a whole, appeals to the prurient interest;" (2) "the work lacks serious literary, artistic, political, or scientific value;" and (3) "the work, taken as a whole, depicts or describes sexual conduct in a patently offensive way."
0
