SWEENEY

v.

COUNTY OF MONROE ET AL.

Citator

Cited By

• Berkemer v. McCARTY, 468 U.S. 420 (U.S. 1984)
  …n similar positions. See State v. Bliss, 238 A. 2d 848, 850 (Del. 1968); County of Dade v. Callahan, 259 So. 2d 504, 507 (Fla. App. 1971), cert. denied, 265 So. 2d 50 (Fla. 1972); State v. Gabrielson, 192 N. W. 2d 792, 796 (Iowa 1971), cert. denied, 409 U. S. 912 (1972); State v. Angelo, 251 La. 250, 254-255, 203 So. 2d 710, 711-717 (1967); State v. Neal, 476 S. W. 2d 547, 553 (Mo. 1972); State v. Macuk, 57 N. J. 1, 15-16, 268 A. 2d 1, 9 (1970). Other state courts have refused to limit in this fashion the re…
• Chaffin v. Stynchcombe, 412 U.S. 17 (U.S. 1973)
  …gher sentence received in this case was not violative of due process. 455 F. 2d 640 (1972). Because two other federal courts of appeals had held to the contrary that Pearce restrictions are applicable,6 we granted certiorari to resolve the conflict. 409 U. S. 912 (1972). II Georgia is one of a small number of States that entrust the sentencing function in felony cases to the jury rather than to the judge.7 While much has been written on the questions whether jury sentencing is desirable8 and whether it is…
• Hickory Fire Fighters Ass'n v. The City OF Hickory, 656 F.2d 917 (4th Cir. 1981)
  …n feet, except in passing one another. The presumption of constitutionality usually accorded legislative decisions does not apply to our review of the ordinance in this case. See Blasecki v. City of Durham, 456 F. 2d 87, 91 (4th Cir.), cert. denied, 409 U.S. 912, 93 S.Ct. 224, 34 L.Ed.2d 172 (1972). Because we find ourselves in the sensitive realm of First Amendment rights,6 we must instead inquire whether the City has compelling governmental interests unrelated to speech which justify time, place, and mann…