Supreme Court of the United States, 1985

Justice O'Connor's opinion for the Court held that the dual sovereignty doctrine permits successive prosecutions by different States for the same conduct because each State derives its prosecutorial authority from an independent source.

The Court, through Justice Rehnquist, held that Strickland's two-part ineffective-assistance test governs challenges to guilty pleas. To establish prejudice, a defendant must show a reasonable probability that, absent counsel's errors, he would have rejected the plea and insisted on trial.

The Court held that a federal district court lacks statutory authority to compel the United States Marshals Service to transport state prisoners to a federal courthouse for testimony in a §1983 action, affirming the Third Circuit.

The Court, in an opinion by Justice Powell, affirmed the Third Circuit and held that, absent an express finding of exceptional circumstances, federal courts lack authority to compel the United States Marshals Service to transport state prisoners to a federal courthouse to testify in a prisoner's § 1983 action against…

The Court held per curiam that admitting an expert's opinion despite his inability to remember its basis did not violate the Confrontation Clause where the defense could freely cross-examine him, expose his memory failure, and present expert testimony challenging the likely basis of his conclusion.

Justice O'Connor's four-Justice opinion concluded that charitable solicitation through the Combined Federal Campaign is protected speech, but that the Campaign is a nonpublic forum.

Justice Blackmun's opinion held that an arbitration agreement need not expressly identify statutory claims to encompass them and that Soler's Sherman Act claims were arbitrable under the agreement governing this international commercial transaction.

The Court held that suppression of impeachment evidence, like suppression of exculpatory evidence, violates due process only when the evidence is material; it does not require automatic reversal under the Confrontation Clause.

Justice White's opinion held that classifications based on intellectual disability do not warrant heightened equal protection scrutiny, but that Cleburne's special-use-permit requirement was unconstitutional as applied to the proposed group home even under rational-basis review.

Justice White's majority opinion held that a private civil RICO action requires neither a prior criminal conviction nor a distinct racketeering injury separate from the harm caused by the predicate acts.

The Court held that the landowner's regulatory-takings claim was not ripe because the planning commission had not reached a final decision on the permissible development of the property and the landowner had not sought available variances.

The Court held that attorney’s fees under § 1988 cannot be recovered from a governmental entity when the plaintiff prevailed only against officials in their personal capacities. Fee liability follows merits liability, and an official-capacity damages action against the State was barred by the Eleventh Amendment.

The Supreme Court reversed the Eighth Circuit’s six‑month suspension of attorney Robert Snyder, holding that his critical letter, though harsh, did not rise to conduct unbecoming a member of the bar and that the appellate court exceeded its authority under Federal Rule of Appellate Procedure 46.

The Court held that the Attorney General is not absolutely immune from suit for constitutional violations arising from national‑security functions, that a district court's denial of qualified immunity is immediately appealable under the collateral‑order doctrine, and that Mitchell is entitled to qualified immunity…

The Court held that revocation of prison good-time credits satisfies due process if supported by some evidence in the record. It declined to decide whether the Constitution independently requires judicial review because state law supplied a mechanism for reviewing the disciplinary decision.

The Supreme Court held that an undercover officer's purchase of two allegedly obscene magazines from an adult bookstore was neither a search nor a seizure under the Fourth Amendment, because the seller had no reasonable privacy interest in goods exposed to the public and voluntarily transferred possession in the sale.

The Supreme Court held that Massachusetts' mass‑change notice satisfied both the statutory and regulatory requirements and therefore did not violate the Due Process Clause; the Court reversed the First Circuit and affirmed the lower court’s dismissal of the constitutional claim.

The Court held that Massachusetts lawfully notified food-stamp recipients of a legislatively mandated reduction in the earned-income deduction. The notice satisfied the governing statute and regulation because it individually informed recipients of the general program change and explained their hearing rights, and due…

The Supreme Court held that Massachusetts' mandated mental-health-benefits statute (Gen. Laws ch. 175, § 47B) is a law 'which regulates insurance' preserved by ERISA's § 514(b)(2)(A) saving clause, even though it 'relates to' ERISA-covered welfare plans under the broad § 514(a) pre-emption clause, and that the statute…

The Court held that the issue concerning the sufficiency of a single-incident instruction was preserved for review and that the instruction improperly allowed municipal liability based solely on one police officer's unconstitutional act.

The Supreme Court held that Ohio could not discipline attorney Philip Q. Zauderer for newspaper advertising containing truthful, nondeceptive legal advice about the Dalkon Shield or an accurate illustration of the device, because restrictions on nondeceptive commercial speech must directly advance a substantial…

Justice O'Connor's six-Justice majority held that The Nation's unauthorized publication of approximately 300 words from President Ford's unpublished memoirs was not fair use. The commercial purpose of scooping authorized publication, the manuscript's unpublished status, the qualitative importance of the passages, and…

Justice Brennan delivered the opinion of the Court, holding that the Florida long‑arm statute as applied to the franchisee did not offend the Due Process Clause; the Eleventh Circuit’s judgment was reversed and the case remanded.

The Court held that the automobile exception permitted a warrantless, probable-cause search of a readily mobile motor home that was parked in a public lot and objectively appeared to be used as a vehicle rather than as a residence.

Justice White delivered the opinion of the Court, holding that the Attorney General's discretion to deny a motion to reopen a suspension of deportation is not subject to judicial review and that the BIA's denial was within that discretion. The Court reversed the Court of Appeals' decision.

The Supreme Court held that a reviewing court's power under 20 U.S.C. § 1415(e)(2) to 'grant such relief as the court determines is appropriate' includes retroactive reimbursement to parents for private school tuition and related expenses incurred when they unilaterally place their handicapped child in a private…

The Supreme Court held that jury instructions telling the jury that the acts of a person of sound mind 'are presumed to be the product of the person's will' and that a person 'is presumed to intend the natural and probable consequences of his acts' could reasonably be understood as a mandatory presumption shifting to…

The Court held that federal law governs how claims under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 are characterized for statute-of-limitations purposes, while state law supplies the applicable limitations period and related rules.

The Supreme Court held that §301 of the Labor Management Relations Act preempts a Wisconsin state-law tort action for bad-faith delay in making disability-benefit payments due under a collective-bargaining agreement.

The Supreme Court affirmed the Eleventh Circuit’s judgment that Alabama’s constitutional provision disenfranchising persons convicted of crimes involving moral turpitude violates the Equal Protection Clause because it was enacted with a racially discriminatory purpose.

The Court held that using deadly force to seize a fleeing suspect violates the Fourth Amendment unless the force is necessary to prevent escape and the officer has probable cause to believe the suspect poses a significant threat of death or serious physical injury to the officer or others.

The Court held that an agency's refusal to institute investigative or enforcement proceedings is presumptively committed to agency discretion and therefore unreviewable under the Administrative Procedure Act.

The Court held that public employees who can be dismissed only for cause have a property interest in continued employment that triggers due‑process protections, requiring at minimum pre‑termination notice and an opportunity to respond, and that the Ohio post‑termination procedures, despite a nine‑month delay…

The Court held that the Court of Appeals improperly applied the clearly erroneous standard when it overturned the District Court's finding that the City denied Anderson the Recreation Director position because of her sex.

The Court held that the Democratic Party lacked statutory standing to bring a direct action against private political committees under the Fund Act, although the DNC and an eligible voter could sue only when the action was appropriate within the Act’s enforcement scheme.

The Court held that the Democratic Party lacked statutory standing to bring a private action seeking a declaration that the presidential public-financing restriction was constitutional, although the Democratic National Committee and an eligible voter were authorized plaintiffs only for appropriate actions consistent…

The Court held that a voluntary but unwarned custodial admission does not automatically taint a later confession obtained after complete Miranda warnings and a knowing, voluntary waiver.

The Court held that the prosecutor's rebuttal comments expressing personal opinions about the defendant's guilt and urging the jury to do its job were improper, but did not constitute plain error warranting reversal because defense counsel invited the response, the comments did not undermine the trial's fundamental…

The Supreme Court held that when an indigent defendant makes a preliminary showing that his sanity at the time of the offense is likely to be a significant factor, the Fourteenth Amendment’s due‑process guarantee requires the State to provide access to a competent psychiatrist for assistance in preparing and…

The Supreme Court overruled National League of Cities v. Usery, concluding that the attempt to define state immunity from Commerce Clause regulation in terms of 'traditional governmental functions' is unworkable and inconsistent with the federalism principles on which that case purported to rest.