HARTMAN

v.

NORTH CAROLINA

Citator

Cited By

• Republic OF Austria v. Altmann, 541 U.S. 677 (U.S. 2004)
  …al law are in issue,” § 1605(a)(3), applies to claims that, like respondent’s, are based on conduct that occurred before the Act’s enactment, and even before the United States adopted the so-called “restrictive theory” of sovereign immunity in 1952. 539 U. S. 987 (2003). I Because this case comes to us from the denial of a motion to dismiss on the pleadings, we assume the truth of the following facts alleged in respondent’s complaint. Born in Austria in 1916, respondent Maria V. Altmann escaped the countr…

  ← 1 / 4 →
• Iowa v. Tovar, 541 U.S. 77 (U.S. 2004)
  …hether, under the facts and applicable law, it is wise to plead guilty. In addition, the court must ensure the defendant understands the nature of the charges against him and the range of allowable punishments.” Id., at 121.9 We granted certiorari, 539 U. S. 987 (2003), in view of the division of opinion on the requirements the Sixth Amendment imposes for waiver of counsel at a plea hearing, compare, e. g., United States v. Akins, 276 F. 3d 1141, 1146-1147 (CA9 2002), with State v. Cashman, 491 N. W. 2d 462…
• Beard v. Banks, 542 U.S. 406 (U.S. 2004)
  …econd petition for certiorari in this case to decide whether Mills applies retroactively to respondent and, if so, whether the Pennsylvania Supreme Court unreasonably applied federal law in holding that there was no Mills error in respondent’s case. 539 U. S. 987 (2003). Although the Lockett/Eddings line of cases supports the Court’s decision in Mills, it does not compel that decision. Mills therefore announced a new rule. We are also unable to conclude that the Mills rule falls under either Teague exception…