BROOKER

v.

DUROCHER DOCK & DREDGE ET AL.

Citator

Cited By

• Peguero v. United States, 526 U.S. 23 (U.S. 1999)
  …s-error review and that, because petitioner was aware of his right to appeal, the purpose of the Rule had been served and petitioner was not entitled to relief. Judgt. order reported at 142 P. 3d 430 (1998), App. 192, 194-195. We granted certiorari. 524 U. S. 982 (1998). In 1992, when petitioner was sentenced, Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 32(a)(2) provided: “Notification of Right To Appeal. — After imposing sentence in a case which has gone to trial on a plea of not guilty, the court shall advise the…
• Saenz v. ROE, 526 U.S. 489 (U.S. 1999)
  …able harm if §11450.03 became operative. Although the decision of the Court of Appeals is consistent with the views of other federal courts that have addressed the issue,9 we granted certiorari because of the importance of the case. Anderson v. Roe, 524 U. S. 982 (1998).10 We now affirm. I — ! HH The word “travel” is not found in the text of the Constitution. Yet the “constitutional right to travel from one State to another” is firmly embedded in our jurisprudence. United States v. Guest, 383 U. S. 745, 75…
• Nat'l Collegiate Athletic Ass'n v. Smith, 525 U.S. 459 (U.S. 1999)
  …fact not in dispute. The NCAA petitioned for this Court’s review, alleging that the Court of Appeals’ decision conflicted with Department of Transp. v. Paralyzed Veterans of America, 477 U. S. 597 (1986). Pet. for Cert. 7-15. We granted certiorari, 524 U. S. 982 (1998), to decide whether a private organization that does not receive federal financial assistance is subject to Title IX because it receives payments from entities that do. r*H f — I Section 901(a) of Title IX of the Education Amendments of 1972…

  ← 1 / 2 →