-
Here's how much you need to earn to live comfortably in the Bay Area's largest cities
A new report details exactly how much money you need to earn in order to live comfortably in the Bay Area’s largest cities. Marianne Favro reports.
Stay connected:
Follow us on Twitter: http://www.twitter.com/nbcbayarea
Like us on Facebook: http://www.facebook.com/nbcbayarea
Follow us on Instagram: http://www.instagram.com/nbcbayarea
Follow us on TikTok: https://www.tiktok.com/@nbcbayarea
Catch up on all the day's news:
http://www.nbcbayarea.com
Download our mobile app:
On iOS: http://nbcbay.com/R1BhqYM
On Android: http://nbcbay.com/rUcA97h
Watch us on OTT:
Add our channel on Roku: https://bit.ly/3ySK60j
Download our app on Amazon Fire TV: https://amzn.to/3FmmiEA
published: 14 May 2024
-
The Difference between San Francisco, Silicon Valley, and the Bay Area Explained
What is the difference between Silicon Valley and the San Francisco Bay Area? Is San Francisco a city or a county? Where in the Bay Area are the headquarters of the largest tech companies in the world?
This video explains the difference between San Francisco, Silicon Valley, and the Bay Area, gives brief overview of the history of Silicon Valley and how it came to dominate the tech industry, and gives you a tour of the Bay Area along with the companies headquartered there.
Image Credits:
Golden Gate Bridge: Rich Niewiroski Jr. - http://www.projectrich.com/gallery
Bay Bridge: Leonard G
San Francisco Skyline along Market Street from Twin Peaks: Vincent Bloch
San Francisco Street Map: Peter Fitzgerald, OpenStreetMap
Government Levels Responsibilities Sprites: Freeciv
Golden Gate Bridge dr...
published: 05 Jul 2016
-
Bay Area, California voters shift away from progressive politics | KTVU
Vice President Kamala Harris easily won her home state of California on election night, but results in local races and statewide show a shift to the political center.
Subscribe to KTVU's YouTube channel:
https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCVhtkN7-c8mA8GXEoxS4YQw?sub_confirmation=1
KTVU delivers the best in-depth reports, interviews and breaking news coverage in the San Francisco Bay Area and California
Watch KTVU's newscasts on https://www.ktvu.com/live
Download KTVU's news and weather apps for free at https://www.ktvu.com/mobile-apps
Subscribe to KTVU's newsletter at https://www.ktvu.com/newsletters
Follow KTVU on Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/ktvu
Follow KTVU on Twitter: https://twitter.com/KTVU
Follow KTVU on Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/ktvu2/
published: 12 Nov 2024
-
Suspect still at-large after downtown San Francisco homicide
San Francisco police are investigating a homicide near the Embarcadero BART station Wednesday morning as they continue to search for the suspect. STORY: https://abc7ne.ws/3CjImTF
#marketstreet #sfpd #homicideinvestigation #bart #abc7news
published: 13 Nov 2024
-
Is the crackdown on San Francisco homelessness working?
While San Francisco says there are fewer homeless people living on the streets, conditions for many have not improved and some say they are worse off. STORY: https://abc7ne.ws/4etfbec
#homelessness #tents #encampment #sfhomeless #abc7news
published: 12 Nov 2024
-
Karate instructors stop attempted carjacking in Oakland | KTVU
Two karate instructors stop an attempted carjacking on Piedmont Avenue in Oakland.
Subscribe to KTVU's YouTube channel:
https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCVhtkN7-c8mA8GXEoxS4YQw?sub_confirmation=1
KTVU delivers the best in-depth reports, interviews and breaking news coverage in the San Francisco Bay Area and California
Watch KTVU's newscasts on https://www.ktvu.com/live
Download KTVU's news and weather apps for free at https://www.ktvu.com/mobile-apps
Subscribe to KTVU's newsletter at https://www.ktvu.com/newsletters
Follow KTVU on Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/ktvu
Follow KTVU on Twitter: https://twitter.com/KTVU
Follow KTVU on Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/ktvu2/
published: 26 Sep 2023
-
San Francisco Bay Area Travel Planning Guide
Everything you need to know to plan a trip to the San Francisco Bay Area in California. In this detailed guide I'll be providing tips on where to stay, what to do, what to eat, and of course what to do when you're done visiting the city of San Francisco and want to venture out further including Napa, Silicon Valley, Santa Cruz, and Monterey.
✅ You might enjoy watching more of my travel guides on San Francisco in this playlist: https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLOVadUHX1B-Ld9Pj94hS8laRJW50pS9ZJ
😀 WHEN'S THE NEXT LIVE STREAM? Sign-up for e-mail notifications of future scheduled live streams here: https://update.yellow-productions.com
✅ Missed my last live stream? Browse through all my Live Streams in this playlist: https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLOVadUHX1B-JGLMwqvLbS9kkgA...
published: 12 Jan 2023
-
New state parking law to improve pedestrian safety further limits space in SF
Drivers in San Francisco on Monday will start getting warnings for a new California parking law that seeks to improve pedestrian visibility and safety and will have a significant impact on available spaces. Ginger Conejero Saab reports.
Stay connected:
Follow us on Twitter: http://www.twitter.com/nbcbayarea
Like us on Facebook: http://www.facebook.com/nbcbayarea
Follow us on Instagram: http://www.instagram.com/nbcbayarea
Follow us on TikTok: https://www.tiktok.com/@nbcbayarea
Catch up on all the day's news:
http://www.nbcbayarea.com
Download our mobile app:
On iOS: http://nbcbay.com/R1BhqYM
On Android: http://nbcbay.com/rUcA97h
Watch us on OTT:
Add our channel on Roku: https://bit.ly/3ySK60j
Download our app on Amazon Fire TV: https://amzn.to/3FmmiEA
#parking
#sanfrancisco
published: 11 Nov 2024
-
San Francisco drivers will want to rethink how close they park to crosswalks. Here's why.
Starting Monday, San Francisco drivers could get warnings if they park too close to a crosswalk.
Website: http://kpix.com/
YouTube: http://www.youtube.com/CBSSanFrancisco
Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/CBSSanFrancisco
Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/kpixtv/
Twitter: https://twitter.com/KPIXtv
published: 11 Nov 2024
-
Nov. 14, 2024 San Francisco Bay Area weather forecast
KRON4 weather anchor Gayle Ong reports. https://www.kron4.com/weather/san-francisco-bay-area-weather-forecast/
published: 14 Nov 2024
2:15
Here's how much you need to earn to live comfortably in the Bay Area's largest cities
A new report details exactly how much money you need to earn in order to live comfortably in the Bay Area’s largest cities. Marianne Favro reports.
Stay connec...
A new report details exactly how much money you need to earn in order to live comfortably in the Bay Area’s largest cities. Marianne Favro reports.
Stay connected:
Follow us on Twitter: http://www.twitter.com/nbcbayarea
Like us on Facebook: http://www.facebook.com/nbcbayarea
Follow us on Instagram: http://www.instagram.com/nbcbayarea
Follow us on TikTok: https://www.tiktok.com/@nbcbayarea
Catch up on all the day's news:
http://www.nbcbayarea.com
Download our mobile app:
On iOS: http://nbcbay.com/R1BhqYM
On Android: http://nbcbay.com/rUcA97h
Watch us on OTT:
Add our channel on Roku: https://bit.ly/3ySK60j
Download our app on Amazon Fire TV: https://amzn.to/3FmmiEA
https://wn.com/Here's_How_Much_You_Need_To_Earn_To_Live_Comfortably_In_The_Bay_Area's_Largest_Cities
A new report details exactly how much money you need to earn in order to live comfortably in the Bay Area’s largest cities. Marianne Favro reports.
Stay connected:
Follow us on Twitter: http://www.twitter.com/nbcbayarea
Like us on Facebook: http://www.facebook.com/nbcbayarea
Follow us on Instagram: http://www.instagram.com/nbcbayarea
Follow us on TikTok: https://www.tiktok.com/@nbcbayarea
Catch up on all the day's news:
http://www.nbcbayarea.com
Download our mobile app:
On iOS: http://nbcbay.com/R1BhqYM
On Android: http://nbcbay.com/rUcA97h
Watch us on OTT:
Add our channel on Roku: https://bit.ly/3ySK60j
Download our app on Amazon Fire TV: https://amzn.to/3FmmiEA
- published: 14 May 2024
- views: 40091
4:05
The Difference between San Francisco, Silicon Valley, and the Bay Area Explained
What is the difference between Silicon Valley and the San Francisco Bay Area? Is San Francisco a city or a county? Where in the Bay Area are the headquarters of...
What is the difference between Silicon Valley and the San Francisco Bay Area? Is San Francisco a city or a county? Where in the Bay Area are the headquarters of the largest tech companies in the world?
This video explains the difference between San Francisco, Silicon Valley, and the Bay Area, gives brief overview of the history of Silicon Valley and how it came to dominate the tech industry, and gives you a tour of the Bay Area along with the companies headquartered there.
Image Credits:
Golden Gate Bridge: Rich Niewiroski Jr. - http://www.projectrich.com/gallery
Bay Bridge: Leonard G
San Francisco Skyline along Market Street from Twin Peaks: Vincent Bloch
San Francisco Street Map: Peter Fitzgerald, OpenStreetMap
Government Levels Responsibilities Sprites: Freeciv
Golden Gate Bridge driving away from SF: Weegee010
California Central Valley: LTSLTS
SV Family Tree/ Fairchildren graphic: IEEE Spectrum Magazine, October 2007
San Francisco Bay Area County Maps: Wikipedia Community
California Counties Map: Wikipedia Community
Map of North America: NuclearVacuum
Links for mobile users:
CGP Grey video which talks about Cities, Counties, and Incorporated vs Unincorporated places: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=naDCCW5TSpU
Crash Course Government video on the separation of powers: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J0gosGXSgsI
Moore's Law: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rtI5wRyHpTg
Numberphile: https://www.youtube.com/user/numberphile
The difference between UK, GB, and England Explained: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rNu8XDBSn10
10 Funny Trolley Problems (On my other channel): https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yywd3bXfYAg
Why is San Francisco so expensive?: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AAlA4hZ94OI
Mistakes:
Moore's first name is Gordon, not George
Lucasfilms moved to San Francisco in 2005, but much of the operation remains in Marin
Pronounciation
https://wn.com/The_Difference_Between_San_Francisco,_Silicon_Valley,_And_The_Bay_Area_Explained
What is the difference between Silicon Valley and the San Francisco Bay Area? Is San Francisco a city or a county? Where in the Bay Area are the headquarters of the largest tech companies in the world?
This video explains the difference between San Francisco, Silicon Valley, and the Bay Area, gives brief overview of the history of Silicon Valley and how it came to dominate the tech industry, and gives you a tour of the Bay Area along with the companies headquartered there.
Image Credits:
Golden Gate Bridge: Rich Niewiroski Jr. - http://www.projectrich.com/gallery
Bay Bridge: Leonard G
San Francisco Skyline along Market Street from Twin Peaks: Vincent Bloch
San Francisco Street Map: Peter Fitzgerald, OpenStreetMap
Government Levels Responsibilities Sprites: Freeciv
Golden Gate Bridge driving away from SF: Weegee010
California Central Valley: LTSLTS
SV Family Tree/ Fairchildren graphic: IEEE Spectrum Magazine, October 2007
San Francisco Bay Area County Maps: Wikipedia Community
California Counties Map: Wikipedia Community
Map of North America: NuclearVacuum
Links for mobile users:
CGP Grey video which talks about Cities, Counties, and Incorporated vs Unincorporated places: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=naDCCW5TSpU
Crash Course Government video on the separation of powers: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J0gosGXSgsI
Moore's Law: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rtI5wRyHpTg
Numberphile: https://www.youtube.com/user/numberphile
The difference between UK, GB, and England Explained: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rNu8XDBSn10
10 Funny Trolley Problems (On my other channel): https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yywd3bXfYAg
Why is San Francisco so expensive?: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AAlA4hZ94OI
Mistakes:
Moore's first name is Gordon, not George
Lucasfilms moved to San Francisco in 2005, but much of the operation remains in Marin
Pronounciation
- published: 05 Jul 2016
- views: 543504
2:52
Bay Area, California voters shift away from progressive politics | KTVU
Vice President Kamala Harris easily won her home state of California on election night, but results in local races and statewide show a shift to the political c...
Vice President Kamala Harris easily won her home state of California on election night, but results in local races and statewide show a shift to the political center.
Subscribe to KTVU's YouTube channel:
https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCVhtkN7-c8mA8GXEoxS4YQw?sub_confirmation=1
KTVU delivers the best in-depth reports, interviews and breaking news coverage in the San Francisco Bay Area and California
Watch KTVU's newscasts on https://www.ktvu.com/live
Download KTVU's news and weather apps for free at https://www.ktvu.com/mobile-apps
Subscribe to KTVU's newsletter at https://www.ktvu.com/newsletters
Follow KTVU on Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/ktvu
Follow KTVU on Twitter: https://twitter.com/KTVU
Follow KTVU on Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/ktvu2/
https://wn.com/Bay_Area,_California_Voters_Shift_Away_From_Progressive_Politics_|_Ktvu
Vice President Kamala Harris easily won her home state of California on election night, but results in local races and statewide show a shift to the political center.
Subscribe to KTVU's YouTube channel:
https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCVhtkN7-c8mA8GXEoxS4YQw?sub_confirmation=1
KTVU delivers the best in-depth reports, interviews and breaking news coverage in the San Francisco Bay Area and California
Watch KTVU's newscasts on https://www.ktvu.com/live
Download KTVU's news and weather apps for free at https://www.ktvu.com/mobile-apps
Subscribe to KTVU's newsletter at https://www.ktvu.com/newsletters
Follow KTVU on Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/ktvu
Follow KTVU on Twitter: https://twitter.com/KTVU
Follow KTVU on Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/ktvu2/
- published: 12 Nov 2024
- views: 47024
2:11
Suspect still at-large after downtown San Francisco homicide
San Francisco police are investigating a homicide near the Embarcadero BART station Wednesday morning as they continue to search for the suspect. STORY: https:/...
San Francisco police are investigating a homicide near the Embarcadero BART station Wednesday morning as they continue to search for the suspect. STORY: https://abc7ne.ws/3CjImTF
#marketstreet #sfpd #homicideinvestigation #bart #abc7news
https://wn.com/Suspect_Still_At_Large_After_Downtown_San_Francisco_Homicide
San Francisco police are investigating a homicide near the Embarcadero BART station Wednesday morning as they continue to search for the suspect. STORY: https://abc7ne.ws/3CjImTF
#marketstreet #sfpd #homicideinvestigation #bart #abc7news
- published: 13 Nov 2024
- views: 31806
5:12
Is the crackdown on San Francisco homelessness working?
While San Francisco says there are fewer homeless people living on the streets, conditions for many have not improved and some say they are worse off. STORY: ht...
While San Francisco says there are fewer homeless people living on the streets, conditions for many have not improved and some say they are worse off. STORY: https://abc7ne.ws/4etfbec
#homelessness #tents #encampment #sfhomeless #abc7news
https://wn.com/Is_The_Crackdown_On_San_Francisco_Homelessness_Working
While San Francisco says there are fewer homeless people living on the streets, conditions for many have not improved and some say they are worse off. STORY: https://abc7ne.ws/4etfbec
#homelessness #tents #encampment #sfhomeless #abc7news
- published: 12 Nov 2024
- views: 15224
0:30
Karate instructors stop attempted carjacking in Oakland | KTVU
Two karate instructors stop an attempted carjacking on Piedmont Avenue in Oakland.
Subscribe to KTVU's YouTube channel:
https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCVhtkN...
Two karate instructors stop an attempted carjacking on Piedmont Avenue in Oakland.
Subscribe to KTVU's YouTube channel:
https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCVhtkN7-c8mA8GXEoxS4YQw?sub_confirmation=1
KTVU delivers the best in-depth reports, interviews and breaking news coverage in the San Francisco Bay Area and California
Watch KTVU's newscasts on https://www.ktvu.com/live
Download KTVU's news and weather apps for free at https://www.ktvu.com/mobile-apps
Subscribe to KTVU's newsletter at https://www.ktvu.com/newsletters
Follow KTVU on Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/ktvu
Follow KTVU on Twitter: https://twitter.com/KTVU
Follow KTVU on Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/ktvu2/
https://wn.com/Karate_Instructors_Stop_Attempted_Carjacking_In_Oakland_|_Ktvu
Two karate instructors stop an attempted carjacking on Piedmont Avenue in Oakland.
Subscribe to KTVU's YouTube channel:
https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCVhtkN7-c8mA8GXEoxS4YQw?sub_confirmation=1
KTVU delivers the best in-depth reports, interviews and breaking news coverage in the San Francisco Bay Area and California
Watch KTVU's newscasts on https://www.ktvu.com/live
Download KTVU's news and weather apps for free at https://www.ktvu.com/mobile-apps
Subscribe to KTVU's newsletter at https://www.ktvu.com/newsletters
Follow KTVU on Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/ktvu
Follow KTVU on Twitter: https://twitter.com/KTVU
Follow KTVU on Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/ktvu2/
- published: 26 Sep 2023
- views: 2286997
56:05
San Francisco Bay Area Travel Planning Guide
Everything you need to know to plan a trip to the San Francisco Bay Area in California. In this detailed guide I'll be providing tips on where to stay, what to...
Everything you need to know to plan a trip to the San Francisco Bay Area in California. In this detailed guide I'll be providing tips on where to stay, what to do, what to eat, and of course what to do when you're done visiting the city of San Francisco and want to venture out further including Napa, Silicon Valley, Santa Cruz, and Monterey.
✅ You might enjoy watching more of my travel guides on San Francisco in this playlist: https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLOVadUHX1B-Ld9Pj94hS8laRJW50pS9ZJ
😀 WHEN'S THE NEXT LIVE STREAM? Sign-up for e-mail notifications of future scheduled live streams here: https://update.yellow-productions.com
✅ Missed my last live stream? Browse through all my Live Streams in this playlist: https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLOVadUHX1B-JGLMwqvLbS9kkgAlhNWTp2
✅ Want to see behind the scenes of my live streaming equipment setup? Watch this video: https://youtu.be/POmNInXAQRY
🔔 BUSINESS INQUIRIES:
[email protected]
💡 Yellow Productions on Social Media:
FACEBOOK: https://facebook.com/YellowProductionsTravel
INSTAGRAM: https://instagram.com/yellowwproductions/
TWITTER: https://twitter.com/chrisraney
📢 Check out my blog:
http://yelloww.net
😀 Yellow Productions Merchandise:
https://shop.yellow-productions.com/
https://wn.com/San_Francisco_Bay_Area_Travel_Planning_Guide
Everything you need to know to plan a trip to the San Francisco Bay Area in California. In this detailed guide I'll be providing tips on where to stay, what to do, what to eat, and of course what to do when you're done visiting the city of San Francisco and want to venture out further including Napa, Silicon Valley, Santa Cruz, and Monterey.
✅ You might enjoy watching more of my travel guides on San Francisco in this playlist: https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLOVadUHX1B-Ld9Pj94hS8laRJW50pS9ZJ
😀 WHEN'S THE NEXT LIVE STREAM? Sign-up for e-mail notifications of future scheduled live streams here: https://update.yellow-productions.com
✅ Missed my last live stream? Browse through all my Live Streams in this playlist: https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLOVadUHX1B-JGLMwqvLbS9kkgAlhNWTp2
✅ Want to see behind the scenes of my live streaming equipment setup? Watch this video: https://youtu.be/POmNInXAQRY
🔔 BUSINESS INQUIRIES:
[email protected]
💡 Yellow Productions on Social Media:
FACEBOOK: https://facebook.com/YellowProductionsTravel
INSTAGRAM: https://instagram.com/yellowwproductions/
TWITTER: https://twitter.com/chrisraney
📢 Check out my blog:
http://yelloww.net
😀 Yellow Productions Merchandise:
https://shop.yellow-productions.com/
- published: 12 Jan 2023
- views: 43505
3:16
New state parking law to improve pedestrian safety further limits space in SF
Drivers in San Francisco on Monday will start getting warnings for a new California parking law that seeks to improve pedestrian visibility and safety and will ...
Drivers in San Francisco on Monday will start getting warnings for a new California parking law that seeks to improve pedestrian visibility and safety and will have a significant impact on available spaces. Ginger Conejero Saab reports.
Stay connected:
Follow us on Twitter: http://www.twitter.com/nbcbayarea
Like us on Facebook: http://www.facebook.com/nbcbayarea
Follow us on Instagram: http://www.instagram.com/nbcbayarea
Follow us on TikTok: https://www.tiktok.com/@nbcbayarea
Catch up on all the day's news:
http://www.nbcbayarea.com
Download our mobile app:
On iOS: http://nbcbay.com/R1BhqYM
On Android: http://nbcbay.com/rUcA97h
Watch us on OTT:
Add our channel on Roku: https://bit.ly/3ySK60j
Download our app on Amazon Fire TV: https://amzn.to/3FmmiEA
#parking
#sanfrancisco
https://wn.com/New_State_Parking_Law_To_Improve_Pedestrian_Safety_Further_Limits_Space_In_Sf
Drivers in San Francisco on Monday will start getting warnings for a new California parking law that seeks to improve pedestrian visibility and safety and will have a significant impact on available spaces. Ginger Conejero Saab reports.
Stay connected:
Follow us on Twitter: http://www.twitter.com/nbcbayarea
Like us on Facebook: http://www.facebook.com/nbcbayarea
Follow us on Instagram: http://www.instagram.com/nbcbayarea
Follow us on TikTok: https://www.tiktok.com/@nbcbayarea
Catch up on all the day's news:
http://www.nbcbayarea.com
Download our mobile app:
On iOS: http://nbcbay.com/R1BhqYM
On Android: http://nbcbay.com/rUcA97h
Watch us on OTT:
Add our channel on Roku: https://bit.ly/3ySK60j
Download our app on Amazon Fire TV: https://amzn.to/3FmmiEA
#parking
#sanfrancisco
- published: 11 Nov 2024
- views: 16100
2:20
San Francisco drivers will want to rethink how close they park to crosswalks. Here's why.
Starting Monday, San Francisco drivers could get warnings if they park too close to a crosswalk.
Website: http://kpix.com/
YouTube: http://www.youtube.com/CBS...
Starting Monday, San Francisco drivers could get warnings if they park too close to a crosswalk.
Website: http://kpix.com/
YouTube: http://www.youtube.com/CBSSanFrancisco
Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/CBSSanFrancisco
Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/kpixtv/
Twitter: https://twitter.com/KPIXtv
https://wn.com/San_Francisco_Drivers_Will_Want_To_Rethink_How_Close_They_Park_To_Crosswalks._Here's_Why.
Starting Monday, San Francisco drivers could get warnings if they park too close to a crosswalk.
Website: http://kpix.com/
YouTube: http://www.youtube.com/CBSSanFrancisco
Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/CBSSanFrancisco
Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/kpixtv/
Twitter: https://twitter.com/KPIXtv
- published: 11 Nov 2024
- views: 15329
2:18
Nov. 14, 2024 San Francisco Bay Area weather forecast
KRON4 weather anchor Gayle Ong reports. https://www.kron4.com/weather/san-francisco-bay-area-weather-forecast/
KRON4 weather anchor Gayle Ong reports. https://www.kron4.com/weather/san-francisco-bay-area-weather-forecast/
https://wn.com/Nov._14,_2024_San_Francisco_Bay_Area_Weather_Forecast
KRON4 weather anchor Gayle Ong reports. https://www.kron4.com/weather/san-francisco-bay-area-weather-forecast/
- published: 14 Nov 2024
- views: 470
-
United States v. White Case Brief Summary | Law Case Explained
Get more case briefs explained with Quimbee. Quimbee has over 16,300 case briefs (and counting) keyed to 223 casebooks ► https://www.quimbee.com/case-briefs-overview
United States v. White | 401 U.S. 745 (1971)
Imagine you have what you think is a confidential conversation with a friend or acquaintance, but you later learn that the other person was a police informant wearing a wire. Does the informant’s use of the device require a search warrant? The Supreme Court addressed that issue in the 1971 case of United States versus White.
On several occasions, Harvey Jackson purchased illegal drugs from James White. Unknown to White, Jackson was a police informant wearing a device that permitted federal agents to listen to their conversations about the drug transactions from a remote locatio...
published: 21 Oct 2020
-
United States v. White (1971) Overview | LSData Case Brief Video Summary
A man named James A. White was sentenced to prison for illegal drug transactions. The issue is whether evidence obtained through electronic surveillance of conversations between White and a government informant violates the Fourth Amendment. The Court of Appeals allowed the use of evidence obtained through electronic surveillance without a warrant. The Supreme Court disagreed with this decision and had to determine if the electronic surveillance violated White's Fourth Amendment rights.
United States v. White (1971)
Supreme Court of the United States
401 U.S. 745, 28 L. Ed. 2d 453, 91 S. Ct. 1122, 1971 U.S. LEXIS 132, SCDB 1970-076
Learn more about this case at https://www.lsd.law/briefs/view/united-states-v-white-121436041
---
Law School Data has over 50,000 case briefs and a one-of-a...
published: 27 May 2023
-
United States v White (1971)
Landmark Supreme Court Case Series - Case #678
published: 04 Mar 2021
-
United States v. White Calf (2011) Overview | LSData Case Brief Video Summary
A man named Roman White Calf was convicted of sexual abuse of a minor when he engaged in sexual activity with a 13-year-old at a party on an Indian Reservation. He appealed his conviction, arguing that the jury was not properly instructed and that the government did not prove he knew the victim's age. The court also considered evidentiary rulings, including the admissibility of a photograph and a police officer's testimony about the minor's appearance and age.
United States v. White Calf (2011)
United States Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit
634 F.3d 453
Learn more about this case at https://www.lsd.law/briefs/view/united-states-v-white-calf-129517068
---
Law School Data has over 50,000 case briefs and a one-of-a-kind brief tool to instantly brief millions of US cases with just t...
published: 16 Aug 2023
-
State v. White Case Brief Summary | Law Case Explained
Get more case briefs explained with Quimbee. Quimbee has over 20,000 case briefs (and counting) keyed to over 223 casebooks ► https://www.quimbee.com/case-briefs-overview
State v. White | 114 S.W.3d 469 (2003)
The Sixth Amendment guarantees criminal defendants the right to counsel. But can a defendant choose any attorney, even if that attorney is a prosecutor? In State versus White, the Tennessee Supreme Court explores the interplay between a defendant’s right to counsel and an attorney’s ethical responsibility to avoid conflicts of interest.
After a grand jury in Shelby County, Tennessee indicted Jeremy White for multiple felonies, he hired attorney Mark McDaniel to defend him. During that same time, McDaniel was also practicing as a part-time assistant district attorney with authorit...
published: 06 Jun 2022
-
State v. White (2011) Case Brief Summary | Law Case Explained
Get more case briefs explained with Quimbee. Quimbee has over 36,300 case briefs (and counting) keyed to 984 casebooks ► https://www.quimbee.com/case-briefs-overview
State v. White | 251 P.3d 820 (2011)
An affirmative defense defeats or reduces an otherwise legitimate criminal charge. State versus White compares and contrasts two specific affirmative defenses that reduce murder to manslaughter.
Brenda and Jon White had a rocky marriage. Brenda felt anxious and angry during the marriage because she suspected that John was addicted to pornography and having an affair. The couple eventually divorced. Jon subsequently refused to pay child support and cancelled Brenda’s health insurance. As a result, Brenda struggled financially and worked longer hours. She tried to alleviate her financial i...
published: 02 Mar 2023
-
United States v. White (1978) Overview | LSData Case Brief Video Summary
The Whites were convicted of conspiracy to possess and distribute heroin. Phillip was also convicted of heroin possession with intent to distribute. They challenged their conspiracy convictions on grounds of insufficient evidence. They were convicted based on the work of two DEA agents who worked with a confidential informant. The informant bought heroin from Williams and concluded that Williams was selling for Claudell. The informant later bought small quantities of heroin from Phillip and discussed becoming a dealer for him. Phillip was later convicted of heroin possession based on Leeper's testimony that he purchased the drugs from Phillip. The court ruled that the chain of custody for the heroin was sufficient.
United States v. White (1978)
United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth...
published: 09 Jun 2023
-
United States v. White (2012) Overview | LSData Case Brief Video Summary
William White, a white supremacist, posted personal information about a juror on his website and was convicted of soliciting violence against the juror. However, the district court later granted his motion for acquittal or a new trial, but the appellate court reversed the decision. During the retrial, the government presented evidence of White's advocacy for violence against individuals he deemed "anti-racist" or "enemies" of white supremacy. The court provided instructions to the jury that speech is protected unless it incites an imminent lawless act. White's challenge to the district court's decision to use an anonymous jury was rejected.
United States v. White (2012)
United States Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit
698 F.3d 1005
Learn more about this case at https://www.lsd.law/...
published: 16 Aug 2023
-
Alabama v. White Case Brief Summary | Law Case Explained
Get more case briefs explained with Quimbee. Quimbee has over 16,300 case briefs (and counting) keyed to 223 casebooks ► https://www.quimbee.com/case-briefs-overview
Alabama v. White | 496 U.S. 325 (1990)
Imagine someone anonymously calls the police department and claims that you’ve got illegal drugs in your car. Does the Fourth Amendment allow an officer to pull your car over and ask you whether you’ve got drugs, based on the anonymous tip? The United States Supreme Court addressed this issue in Alabama versus White.
An anonymous caller told an officer with the Montgomery Police Department that an undescribed woman named Vanessa White was a drug dealer who would be engaging in a drug transaction later that day. The caller said White would drive away from a particular apartment complex...
published: 13 Nov 2020
-
United States v. White (2011) Overview | LSData Case Brief Video Summary
The defendant is a white supremacist leader who posted personal information about a juror on his website and made threatening statements towards various individuals and groups, including Jewish people and anti-racist activists. The government accused the defendant of soliciting violence and inciting harm through his online posts. The case involves potential violations of laws related to intimidation, harassment, hate speech, and incitement to violence.
The most relevant facts to the court's analysis are the nature and content of the defendant's posts, including whether they constitute protected speech or solicitation of violence. The court must also consider whether the defendant's statements present a threat to public safety and violate applicable laws.
United States v. White (2011)
Uni...
published: 16 Aug 2023
1:25
United States v. White Case Brief Summary | Law Case Explained
Get more case briefs explained with Quimbee. Quimbee has over 16,300 case briefs (and counting) keyed to 223 casebooks ► https://www.quimbee.com/case-briefs-ove...
Get more case briefs explained with Quimbee. Quimbee has over 16,300 case briefs (and counting) keyed to 223 casebooks ► https://www.quimbee.com/case-briefs-overview
United States v. White | 401 U.S. 745 (1971)
Imagine you have what you think is a confidential conversation with a friend or acquaintance, but you later learn that the other person was a police informant wearing a wire. Does the informant’s use of the device require a search warrant? The Supreme Court addressed that issue in the 1971 case of United States versus White.
On several occasions, Harvey Jackson purchased illegal drugs from James White. Unknown to White, Jackson was a police informant wearing a device that permitted federal agents to listen to their conversations about the drug transactions from a remote location. The agents didn’t obtain a search warrant before conducting the electronic eavesdropping. A federal grand jury later charged White with felony drug charges. White pleaded not guilty and had a jury trial. The district court overruled White’s objection that the agents’ electronic eavesdropping constituted an unconstitutional warrantless search and allowed the agents to testify about what they heard White say to Harvey. The jury convicted White, and he was sentenced to 25 years in federal prison.
White appealed to the Unites States Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit, which reversed his conviction after concluding that the agents violated the Fourth Amendment by listening to White’s conversations with Harvey.
Want more details on this case? Get the rule of law, issues, holding and reasonings, and more case facts here: https://www.quimbee.com/cases/united-states-v-white
The Quimbee App features over 16,300 case briefs keyed to 223 casebooks. Try it free for 7 days! ► https://www.quimbee.com/case-briefs-overview
Have Questions about this Case? Submit your questions and get answers from a real attorney here: https://www.quimbee.com/cases/united-states-v-white
Did we just become best friends? Stay connected to Quimbee here: Subscribe to our YouTube Channel ► https://www.youtube.com/subscription_center?add_user=QuimbeeDotCom
Quimbee Case Brief App ► https://www.quimbee.com/case-briefs-overview
Facebook ► https://www.facebook.com/quimbeedotcom/
Twitter ► https://twitter.com/quimbeedotcom
#casebriefs #lawcases #casesummaries
https://wn.com/United_States_V._White_Case_Brief_Summary_|_Law_Case_Explained
Get more case briefs explained with Quimbee. Quimbee has over 16,300 case briefs (and counting) keyed to 223 casebooks ► https://www.quimbee.com/case-briefs-overview
United States v. White | 401 U.S. 745 (1971)
Imagine you have what you think is a confidential conversation with a friend or acquaintance, but you later learn that the other person was a police informant wearing a wire. Does the informant’s use of the device require a search warrant? The Supreme Court addressed that issue in the 1971 case of United States versus White.
On several occasions, Harvey Jackson purchased illegal drugs from James White. Unknown to White, Jackson was a police informant wearing a device that permitted federal agents to listen to their conversations about the drug transactions from a remote location. The agents didn’t obtain a search warrant before conducting the electronic eavesdropping. A federal grand jury later charged White with felony drug charges. White pleaded not guilty and had a jury trial. The district court overruled White’s objection that the agents’ electronic eavesdropping constituted an unconstitutional warrantless search and allowed the agents to testify about what they heard White say to Harvey. The jury convicted White, and he was sentenced to 25 years in federal prison.
White appealed to the Unites States Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit, which reversed his conviction after concluding that the agents violated the Fourth Amendment by listening to White’s conversations with Harvey.
Want more details on this case? Get the rule of law, issues, holding and reasonings, and more case facts here: https://www.quimbee.com/cases/united-states-v-white
The Quimbee App features over 16,300 case briefs keyed to 223 casebooks. Try it free for 7 days! ► https://www.quimbee.com/case-briefs-overview
Have Questions about this Case? Submit your questions and get answers from a real attorney here: https://www.quimbee.com/cases/united-states-v-white
Did we just become best friends? Stay connected to Quimbee here: Subscribe to our YouTube Channel ► https://www.youtube.com/subscription_center?add_user=QuimbeeDotCom
Quimbee Case Brief App ► https://www.quimbee.com/case-briefs-overview
Facebook ► https://www.facebook.com/quimbeedotcom/
Twitter ► https://twitter.com/quimbeedotcom
#casebriefs #lawcases #casesummaries
- published: 21 Oct 2020
- views: 2317
1:34
United States v. White (1971) Overview | LSData Case Brief Video Summary
A man named James A. White was sentenced to prison for illegal drug transactions. The issue is whether evidence obtained through electronic surveillance of conv...
A man named James A. White was sentenced to prison for illegal drug transactions. The issue is whether evidence obtained through electronic surveillance of conversations between White and a government informant violates the Fourth Amendment. The Court of Appeals allowed the use of evidence obtained through electronic surveillance without a warrant. The Supreme Court disagreed with this decision and had to determine if the electronic surveillance violated White's Fourth Amendment rights.
United States v. White (1971)
Supreme Court of the United States
401 U.S. 745, 28 L. Ed. 2d 453, 91 S. Ct. 1122, 1971 U.S. LEXIS 132, SCDB 1970-076
Learn more about this case at https://www.lsd.law/briefs/view/united-states-v-white-121436041
---
Law School Data has over 50,000 case briefs and a one-of-a-kind brief tool to instantly brief millions of US cases with just the name or case cite.
Check out all of our case briefs: https://www.lsd.law/briefs
Briefs come with built in LSDefine and DeepDive, which allow you to read as quickly or as deeply as you want. Each brief has a built in legal dictionary and recursive summaries that go into more and more detail, until you eventually hit the original case text.
Subscribe for new videos every week: https://www.youtube.com/@LSData?sub_confirmation=1
https://wn.com/United_States_V._White_(1971)_Overview_|_Lsdata_Case_Brief_Video_Summary
A man named James A. White was sentenced to prison for illegal drug transactions. The issue is whether evidence obtained through electronic surveillance of conversations between White and a government informant violates the Fourth Amendment. The Court of Appeals allowed the use of evidence obtained through electronic surveillance without a warrant. The Supreme Court disagreed with this decision and had to determine if the electronic surveillance violated White's Fourth Amendment rights.
United States v. White (1971)
Supreme Court of the United States
401 U.S. 745, 28 L. Ed. 2d 453, 91 S. Ct. 1122, 1971 U.S. LEXIS 132, SCDB 1970-076
Learn more about this case at https://www.lsd.law/briefs/view/united-states-v-white-121436041
---
Law School Data has over 50,000 case briefs and a one-of-a-kind brief tool to instantly brief millions of US cases with just the name or case cite.
Check out all of our case briefs: https://www.lsd.law/briefs
Briefs come with built in LSDefine and DeepDive, which allow you to read as quickly or as deeply as you want. Each brief has a built in legal dictionary and recursive summaries that go into more and more detail, until you eventually hit the original case text.
Subscribe for new videos every week: https://www.youtube.com/@LSData?sub_confirmation=1
- published: 27 May 2023
- views: 80
1:30
United States v White (1971)
Landmark Supreme Court Case Series - Case #678
Landmark Supreme Court Case Series - Case #678
https://wn.com/United_States_V_White_(1971)
Landmark Supreme Court Case Series - Case #678
- published: 04 Mar 2021
- views: 332
2:44
United States v. White Calf (2011) Overview | LSData Case Brief Video Summary
A man named Roman White Calf was convicted of sexual abuse of a minor when he engaged in sexual activity with a 13-year-old at a party on an Indian Reservation....
A man named Roman White Calf was convicted of sexual abuse of a minor when he engaged in sexual activity with a 13-year-old at a party on an Indian Reservation. He appealed his conviction, arguing that the jury was not properly instructed and that the government did not prove he knew the victim's age. The court also considered evidentiary rulings, including the admissibility of a photograph and a police officer's testimony about the minor's appearance and age.
United States v. White Calf (2011)
United States Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit
634 F.3d 453
Learn more about this case at https://www.lsd.law/briefs/view/united-states-v-white-calf-129517068
---
Law School Data has over 50,000 case briefs and a one-of-a-kind brief tool to instantly brief millions of US cases with just the name or case cite.
Check out all of our case briefs: https://www.lsd.law/briefs
Briefs come with built in LSDefine and DeepDive, which allow you to read as quickly or as deeply as you want. Each brief has a built in legal dictionary and recursive summaries that go into more and more detail, until you eventually hit the original case text.
Subscribe for new videos every week: https://www.youtube.com/@LSData?sub_confirmation=1
https://wn.com/United_States_V._White_Calf_(2011)_Overview_|_Lsdata_Case_Brief_Video_Summary
A man named Roman White Calf was convicted of sexual abuse of a minor when he engaged in sexual activity with a 13-year-old at a party on an Indian Reservation. He appealed his conviction, arguing that the jury was not properly instructed and that the government did not prove he knew the victim's age. The court also considered evidentiary rulings, including the admissibility of a photograph and a police officer's testimony about the minor's appearance and age.
United States v. White Calf (2011)
United States Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit
634 F.3d 453
Learn more about this case at https://www.lsd.law/briefs/view/united-states-v-white-calf-129517068
---
Law School Data has over 50,000 case briefs and a one-of-a-kind brief tool to instantly brief millions of US cases with just the name or case cite.
Check out all of our case briefs: https://www.lsd.law/briefs
Briefs come with built in LSDefine and DeepDive, which allow you to read as quickly or as deeply as you want. Each brief has a built in legal dictionary and recursive summaries that go into more and more detail, until you eventually hit the original case text.
Subscribe for new videos every week: https://www.youtube.com/@LSData?sub_confirmation=1
- published: 16 Aug 2023
- views: 27
1:22
State v. White Case Brief Summary | Law Case Explained
Get more case briefs explained with Quimbee. Quimbee has over 20,000 case briefs (and counting) keyed to over 223 casebooks ► https://www.quimbee.com/case-brief...
Get more case briefs explained with Quimbee. Quimbee has over 20,000 case briefs (and counting) keyed to over 223 casebooks ► https://www.quimbee.com/case-briefs-overview
State v. White | 114 S.W.3d 469 (2003)
The Sixth Amendment guarantees criminal defendants the right to counsel. But can a defendant choose any attorney, even if that attorney is a prosecutor? In State versus White, the Tennessee Supreme Court explores the interplay between a defendant’s right to counsel and an attorney’s ethical responsibility to avoid conflicts of interest.
After a grand jury in Shelby County, Tennessee indicted Jeremy White for multiple felonies, he hired attorney Mark McDaniel to defend him. During that same time, McDaniel was also practicing as a part-time assistant district attorney with authority to prosecute crimes in Shelby County. Before White’s case went to trial, the state of Tennessee moved to disqualify McDaniel from representing White.
The trial court disqualified McDaniel based on a perceived conflict of interest. The trial court also barred White from waiving the conflict without the state’s consent. White appealed to the criminal appeals court, which affirmed the trial court judgment but found an actual conflict of interest rather than a perceived one. White then appealed to the Tennessee Supreme Court.
Want more details on this case? Get the rule of law, issues, holding and reasonings, and more case facts here: https://www.quimbee.com/cases/state-v-white-114-s-w-3d-469-2003
The Quimbee App features over 20,000 case briefs keyed to over 223 casebooks. Try it free for 7 days! ► https://www.quimbee.com/case-briefs-overview
Have Questions about this Case? Submit your questions and get answers from a real attorney here: https://www.quimbee.com/cases/state-v-white-114-s-w-3d-469-2003
Did we just become best friends? Stay connected to Quimbee here: Subscribe to our YouTube Channel ► https://www.youtube.com/subscription_center?add_user=QuimbeeDotCom
Quimbee Case Brief App ► https://www.quimbee.com/case-briefs-overview
Facebook ► https://www.facebook.com/quimbeedotcom/
Twitter ► https://twitter.com/quimbeedotcom
#casebriefs #lawcases #casesummaries
https://wn.com/State_V._White_Case_Brief_Summary_|_Law_Case_Explained
Get more case briefs explained with Quimbee. Quimbee has over 20,000 case briefs (and counting) keyed to over 223 casebooks ► https://www.quimbee.com/case-briefs-overview
State v. White | 114 S.W.3d 469 (2003)
The Sixth Amendment guarantees criminal defendants the right to counsel. But can a defendant choose any attorney, even if that attorney is a prosecutor? In State versus White, the Tennessee Supreme Court explores the interplay between a defendant’s right to counsel and an attorney’s ethical responsibility to avoid conflicts of interest.
After a grand jury in Shelby County, Tennessee indicted Jeremy White for multiple felonies, he hired attorney Mark McDaniel to defend him. During that same time, McDaniel was also practicing as a part-time assistant district attorney with authority to prosecute crimes in Shelby County. Before White’s case went to trial, the state of Tennessee moved to disqualify McDaniel from representing White.
The trial court disqualified McDaniel based on a perceived conflict of interest. The trial court also barred White from waiving the conflict without the state’s consent. White appealed to the criminal appeals court, which affirmed the trial court judgment but found an actual conflict of interest rather than a perceived one. White then appealed to the Tennessee Supreme Court.
Want more details on this case? Get the rule of law, issues, holding and reasonings, and more case facts here: https://www.quimbee.com/cases/state-v-white-114-s-w-3d-469-2003
The Quimbee App features over 20,000 case briefs keyed to over 223 casebooks. Try it free for 7 days! ► https://www.quimbee.com/case-briefs-overview
Have Questions about this Case? Submit your questions and get answers from a real attorney here: https://www.quimbee.com/cases/state-v-white-114-s-w-3d-469-2003
Did we just become best friends? Stay connected to Quimbee here: Subscribe to our YouTube Channel ► https://www.youtube.com/subscription_center?add_user=QuimbeeDotCom
Quimbee Case Brief App ► https://www.quimbee.com/case-briefs-overview
Facebook ► https://www.facebook.com/quimbeedotcom/
Twitter ► https://twitter.com/quimbeedotcom
#casebriefs #lawcases #casesummaries
- published: 06 Jun 2022
- views: 204
2:17
State v. White (2011) Case Brief Summary | Law Case Explained
Get more case briefs explained with Quimbee. Quimbee has over 36,300 case briefs (and counting) keyed to 984 casebooks ► https://www.quimbee.com/case-briefs-ove...
Get more case briefs explained with Quimbee. Quimbee has over 36,300 case briefs (and counting) keyed to 984 casebooks ► https://www.quimbee.com/case-briefs-overview
State v. White | 251 P.3d 820 (2011)
An affirmative defense defeats or reduces an otherwise legitimate criminal charge. State versus White compares and contrasts two specific affirmative defenses that reduce murder to manslaughter.
Brenda and Jon White had a rocky marriage. Brenda felt anxious and angry during the marriage because she suspected that John was addicted to pornography and having an affair. The couple eventually divorced. Jon subsequently refused to pay child support and cancelled Brenda’s health insurance. As a result, Brenda struggled financially and worked longer hours. She tried to alleviate her financial issues by refinancing the Whites’ marital home. But she needed Jon’s cooperation and signature. So, she went to Jon’s office to discuss the refinancing. They argued because Jon was reluctant to cooperate. Brenda became frustrated and drove away. She returned four hours later and saw Jon talking on a cell phone that he had denied owning during their marriage. Brenda chased Jon with her car, but he escaped into the office building. She then drove into the building and struck Jon twice. The State of Utah charged her with attempted murder. Before trial, Brenda moved for the judge to provide a jury instruction on the extreme-emotional-distress defense. She argued that when she saw Jon’s cell phone, the stress and emotion accumulated throughout their relationship overcame her and made her lose control.
The trial court denied Brenda’s motion, and she filed an interlocutory appeal. The court of appeals held that the extreme-emotional-distress defense requires a loss of self-control resulting from a highly provocative and contemporaneous triggering event. It concluded that seeing Jon’s cell phone wasn’t sufficiently provocative and Brenda’s other prior stressors didn’t occur contemporaneously to her loss of control. Thus, the court of appeals affirmed the trial court’s judgment, and Brenda appealed to the Utah Supreme Court.
Want more details on this case? Get the rule of law, issues, holding and reasonings, and more case facts here: https://www.quimbee.com/cases/state-v-white-251-p-3d-820-2011
The Quimbee App features over 36,300 case briefs keyed to 984 casebooks. Try it free for 7 days! ► https://www.quimbee.com/case-briefs-overview
Have Questions about this Case? Submit your questions and get answers from a real attorney here: https://www.quimbee.com/cases/state-v-white-251-p-3d-820-2011
Did we just become best friends? Stay connected to Quimbee here:
Subscribe to our YouTube Channel ► https://www.youtube.com/subscription_center?add_user=QuimbeeDotCom
Quimbee Case Brief App ► https://www.quimbee.com/case-briefs-overview
Facebook ► https://www.facebook.com/quimbeedotcom/
Twitter ► https://twitter.com/quimbeedotcom
#casebriefs #lawcases #casesummaries
https://wn.com/State_V._White_(2011)_Case_Brief_Summary_|_Law_Case_Explained
Get more case briefs explained with Quimbee. Quimbee has over 36,300 case briefs (and counting) keyed to 984 casebooks ► https://www.quimbee.com/case-briefs-overview
State v. White | 251 P.3d 820 (2011)
An affirmative defense defeats or reduces an otherwise legitimate criminal charge. State versus White compares and contrasts two specific affirmative defenses that reduce murder to manslaughter.
Brenda and Jon White had a rocky marriage. Brenda felt anxious and angry during the marriage because she suspected that John was addicted to pornography and having an affair. The couple eventually divorced. Jon subsequently refused to pay child support and cancelled Brenda’s health insurance. As a result, Brenda struggled financially and worked longer hours. She tried to alleviate her financial issues by refinancing the Whites’ marital home. But she needed Jon’s cooperation and signature. So, she went to Jon’s office to discuss the refinancing. They argued because Jon was reluctant to cooperate. Brenda became frustrated and drove away. She returned four hours later and saw Jon talking on a cell phone that he had denied owning during their marriage. Brenda chased Jon with her car, but he escaped into the office building. She then drove into the building and struck Jon twice. The State of Utah charged her with attempted murder. Before trial, Brenda moved for the judge to provide a jury instruction on the extreme-emotional-distress defense. She argued that when she saw Jon’s cell phone, the stress and emotion accumulated throughout their relationship overcame her and made her lose control.
The trial court denied Brenda’s motion, and she filed an interlocutory appeal. The court of appeals held that the extreme-emotional-distress defense requires a loss of self-control resulting from a highly provocative and contemporaneous triggering event. It concluded that seeing Jon’s cell phone wasn’t sufficiently provocative and Brenda’s other prior stressors didn’t occur contemporaneously to her loss of control. Thus, the court of appeals affirmed the trial court’s judgment, and Brenda appealed to the Utah Supreme Court.
Want more details on this case? Get the rule of law, issues, holding and reasonings, and more case facts here: https://www.quimbee.com/cases/state-v-white-251-p-3d-820-2011
The Quimbee App features over 36,300 case briefs keyed to 984 casebooks. Try it free for 7 days! ► https://www.quimbee.com/case-briefs-overview
Have Questions about this Case? Submit your questions and get answers from a real attorney here: https://www.quimbee.com/cases/state-v-white-251-p-3d-820-2011
Did we just become best friends? Stay connected to Quimbee here:
Subscribe to our YouTube Channel ► https://www.youtube.com/subscription_center?add_user=QuimbeeDotCom
Quimbee Case Brief App ► https://www.quimbee.com/case-briefs-overview
Facebook ► https://www.facebook.com/quimbeedotcom/
Twitter ► https://twitter.com/quimbeedotcom
#casebriefs #lawcases #casesummaries
- published: 02 Mar 2023
- views: 79
1:57
United States v. White (1978) Overview | LSData Case Brief Video Summary
The Whites were convicted of conspiracy to possess and distribute heroin. Phillip was also convicted of heroin possession with intent to distribute. They challe...
The Whites were convicted of conspiracy to possess and distribute heroin. Phillip was also convicted of heroin possession with intent to distribute. They challenged their conspiracy convictions on grounds of insufficient evidence. They were convicted based on the work of two DEA agents who worked with a confidential informant. The informant bought heroin from Williams and concluded that Williams was selling for Claudell. The informant later bought small quantities of heroin from Phillip and discussed becoming a dealer for him. Phillip was later convicted of heroin possession based on Leeper's testimony that he purchased the drugs from Phillip. The court ruled that the chain of custody for the heroin was sufficient.
United States v. White (1978)
United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit
569 F.2d 263
Learn more about this case at https://www.lsd.law/briefs/view/united-states-v-white-8820859
---
Law School Data has over 50,000 case briefs and a one-of-a-kind brief tool to instantly brief millions of US cases with just the name or case cite.
Check out all of our case briefs: https://www.lsd.law/briefs
Briefs come with built in LSDefine and DeepDive, which allow you to read as quickly or as deeply as you want. Each brief has a built in legal dictionary and recursive summaries that go into more and more detail, until you eventually hit the original case text.
Subscribe for new videos every week: https://www.youtube.com/@LSData?sub_confirmation=1
https://wn.com/United_States_V._White_(1978)_Overview_|_Lsdata_Case_Brief_Video_Summary
The Whites were convicted of conspiracy to possess and distribute heroin. Phillip was also convicted of heroin possession with intent to distribute. They challenged their conspiracy convictions on grounds of insufficient evidence. They were convicted based on the work of two DEA agents who worked with a confidential informant. The informant bought heroin from Williams and concluded that Williams was selling for Claudell. The informant later bought small quantities of heroin from Phillip and discussed becoming a dealer for him. Phillip was later convicted of heroin possession based on Leeper's testimony that he purchased the drugs from Phillip. The court ruled that the chain of custody for the heroin was sufficient.
United States v. White (1978)
United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit
569 F.2d 263
Learn more about this case at https://www.lsd.law/briefs/view/united-states-v-white-8820859
---
Law School Data has over 50,000 case briefs and a one-of-a-kind brief tool to instantly brief millions of US cases with just the name or case cite.
Check out all of our case briefs: https://www.lsd.law/briefs
Briefs come with built in LSDefine and DeepDive, which allow you to read as quickly or as deeply as you want. Each brief has a built in legal dictionary and recursive summaries that go into more and more detail, until you eventually hit the original case text.
Subscribe for new videos every week: https://www.youtube.com/@LSData?sub_confirmation=1
- published: 09 Jun 2023
- views: 10
2:14
United States v. White (2012) Overview | LSData Case Brief Video Summary
William White, a white supremacist, posted personal information about a juror on his website and was convicted of soliciting violence against the juror. However...
William White, a white supremacist, posted personal information about a juror on his website and was convicted of soliciting violence against the juror. However, the district court later granted his motion for acquittal or a new trial, but the appellate court reversed the decision. During the retrial, the government presented evidence of White's advocacy for violence against individuals he deemed "anti-racist" or "enemies" of white supremacy. The court provided instructions to the jury that speech is protected unless it incites an imminent lawless act. White's challenge to the district court's decision to use an anonymous jury was rejected.
United States v. White (2012)
United States Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit
698 F.3d 1005
Learn more about this case at https://www.lsd.law/briefs/view/united-states-v-white-12903736
---
Law School Data has over 50,000 case briefs and a one-of-a-kind brief tool to instantly brief millions of US cases with just the name or case cite.
Check out all of our case briefs: https://www.lsd.law/briefs
Briefs come with built in LSDefine and DeepDive, which allow you to read as quickly or as deeply as you want. Each brief has a built in legal dictionary and recursive summaries that go into more and more detail, until you eventually hit the original case text.
Subscribe for new videos every week: https://www.youtube.com/@LSData?sub_confirmation=1
https://wn.com/United_States_V._White_(2012)_Overview_|_Lsdata_Case_Brief_Video_Summary
William White, a white supremacist, posted personal information about a juror on his website and was convicted of soliciting violence against the juror. However, the district court later granted his motion for acquittal or a new trial, but the appellate court reversed the decision. During the retrial, the government presented evidence of White's advocacy for violence against individuals he deemed "anti-racist" or "enemies" of white supremacy. The court provided instructions to the jury that speech is protected unless it incites an imminent lawless act. White's challenge to the district court's decision to use an anonymous jury was rejected.
United States v. White (2012)
United States Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit
698 F.3d 1005
Learn more about this case at https://www.lsd.law/briefs/view/united-states-v-white-12903736
---
Law School Data has over 50,000 case briefs and a one-of-a-kind brief tool to instantly brief millions of US cases with just the name or case cite.
Check out all of our case briefs: https://www.lsd.law/briefs
Briefs come with built in LSDefine and DeepDive, which allow you to read as quickly or as deeply as you want. Each brief has a built in legal dictionary and recursive summaries that go into more and more detail, until you eventually hit the original case text.
Subscribe for new videos every week: https://www.youtube.com/@LSData?sub_confirmation=1
- published: 16 Aug 2023
- views: 5
1:58
Alabama v. White Case Brief Summary | Law Case Explained
Get more case briefs explained with Quimbee. Quimbee has over 16,300 case briefs (and counting) keyed to 223 casebooks ► https://www.quimbee.com/case-briefs-ove...
Get more case briefs explained with Quimbee. Quimbee has over 16,300 case briefs (and counting) keyed to 223 casebooks ► https://www.quimbee.com/case-briefs-overview
Alabama v. White | 496 U.S. 325 (1990)
Imagine someone anonymously calls the police department and claims that you’ve got illegal drugs in your car. Does the Fourth Amendment allow an officer to pull your car over and ask you whether you’ve got drugs, based on the anonymous tip? The United States Supreme Court addressed this issue in Alabama versus White.
An anonymous caller told an officer with the Montgomery Police Department that an undescribed woman named Vanessa White was a drug dealer who would be engaging in a drug transaction later that day. The caller said White would drive away from a particular apartment complex at a certain time, in a brown Plymouth station wagon with a broken taillight. She would travel to Dobey’s Motel, which was four miles from the apartment complex.
Officers conducted surveillance of the apartment complex and noticed a car fitting the description given by the caller. They saw a woman get in the car and drive away. The officers followed her until it was apparent that she was driving in the direction of the motel. Shortly before White would have arrived at the motel, a police car pulled her over. The officer informed White that he had stopped her based on suspicion that she had drugs in the car. The officer then obtained White’s consent to search her car for the drugs.
Officers found marijuana inside the car and cocaine inside White’s purse. White was charged in state court with drug possession. After the trial court denied her motion to suppress the drugs under the Fourth Amendment, White entered a conditional guilty plea, reserving her right to appeal. On appeal, the Alabama Court of Criminal Appeals reversed White’s conviction, concluding that the officers had violated the Fourth Amendment. The Alabama Supreme Court denied review.
The state successfully petitioned the United States Supreme Court to review White’s case.
Want more details on this case? Get the rule of law, issues, holding and reasonings, and more case facts here: https://www.quimbee.com/cases/alabama-v-white
The Quimbee App features over 16,300 case briefs keyed to 223 casebooks. Try it free for 7 days! ► https://www.quimbee.com/case-briefs-overview
Have Questions about this Case? Submit your questions and get answers from a real attorney here: https://www.quimbee.com/cases/alabama-v-white
Did we just become best friends? Stay connected to Quimbee here: Subscribe to our YouTube Channel ► https://www.youtube.com/subscription_center?add_user=QuimbeeDotCom
Quimbee Case Brief App ► https://www.quimbee.com/case-briefs-overview
Facebook ► https://www.facebook.com/quimbeedotcom/
Twitter ► https://twitter.com/quimbeedotcom
#casebriefs #lawcases #casesummaries
https://wn.com/Alabama_V._White_Case_Brief_Summary_|_Law_Case_Explained
Get more case briefs explained with Quimbee. Quimbee has over 16,300 case briefs (and counting) keyed to 223 casebooks ► https://www.quimbee.com/case-briefs-overview
Alabama v. White | 496 U.S. 325 (1990)
Imagine someone anonymously calls the police department and claims that you’ve got illegal drugs in your car. Does the Fourth Amendment allow an officer to pull your car over and ask you whether you’ve got drugs, based on the anonymous tip? The United States Supreme Court addressed this issue in Alabama versus White.
An anonymous caller told an officer with the Montgomery Police Department that an undescribed woman named Vanessa White was a drug dealer who would be engaging in a drug transaction later that day. The caller said White would drive away from a particular apartment complex at a certain time, in a brown Plymouth station wagon with a broken taillight. She would travel to Dobey’s Motel, which was four miles from the apartment complex.
Officers conducted surveillance of the apartment complex and noticed a car fitting the description given by the caller. They saw a woman get in the car and drive away. The officers followed her until it was apparent that she was driving in the direction of the motel. Shortly before White would have arrived at the motel, a police car pulled her over. The officer informed White that he had stopped her based on suspicion that she had drugs in the car. The officer then obtained White’s consent to search her car for the drugs.
Officers found marijuana inside the car and cocaine inside White’s purse. White was charged in state court with drug possession. After the trial court denied her motion to suppress the drugs under the Fourth Amendment, White entered a conditional guilty plea, reserving her right to appeal. On appeal, the Alabama Court of Criminal Appeals reversed White’s conviction, concluding that the officers had violated the Fourth Amendment. The Alabama Supreme Court denied review.
The state successfully petitioned the United States Supreme Court to review White’s case.
Want more details on this case? Get the rule of law, issues, holding and reasonings, and more case facts here: https://www.quimbee.com/cases/alabama-v-white
The Quimbee App features over 16,300 case briefs keyed to 223 casebooks. Try it free for 7 days! ► https://www.quimbee.com/case-briefs-overview
Have Questions about this Case? Submit your questions and get answers from a real attorney here: https://www.quimbee.com/cases/alabama-v-white
Did we just become best friends? Stay connected to Quimbee here: Subscribe to our YouTube Channel ► https://www.youtube.com/subscription_center?add_user=QuimbeeDotCom
Quimbee Case Brief App ► https://www.quimbee.com/case-briefs-overview
Facebook ► https://www.facebook.com/quimbeedotcom/
Twitter ► https://twitter.com/quimbeedotcom
#casebriefs #lawcases #casesummaries
- published: 13 Nov 2020
- views: 2557
2:14
United States v. White (2011) Overview | LSData Case Brief Video Summary
The defendant is a white supremacist leader who posted personal information about a juror on his website and made threatening statements towards various individ...
The defendant is a white supremacist leader who posted personal information about a juror on his website and made threatening statements towards various individuals and groups, including Jewish people and anti-racist activists. The government accused the defendant of soliciting violence and inciting harm through his online posts. The case involves potential violations of laws related to intimidation, harassment, hate speech, and incitement to violence.
The most relevant facts to the court's analysis are the nature and content of the defendant's posts, including whether they constitute protected speech or solicitation of violence. The court must also consider whether the defendant's statements present a threat to public safety and violate applicable laws.
United States v. White (2011)
United States District Court for the Northern District of Illinois
779 F. Supp. 2d 775
Learn more about this case at https://www.lsd.law/briefs/view/united-states-v-white-132050542
---
Law School Data has over 50,000 case briefs and a one-of-a-kind brief tool to instantly brief millions of US cases with just the name or case cite.
Check out all of our case briefs: https://www.lsd.law/briefs
Briefs come with built in LSDefine and DeepDive, which allow you to read as quickly or as deeply as you want. Each brief has a built in legal dictionary and recursive summaries that go into more and more detail, until you eventually hit the original case text.
Subscribe for new videos every week: https://www.youtube.com/@LSData?sub_confirmation=1
https://wn.com/United_States_V._White_(2011)_Overview_|_Lsdata_Case_Brief_Video_Summary
The defendant is a white supremacist leader who posted personal information about a juror on his website and made threatening statements towards various individuals and groups, including Jewish people and anti-racist activists. The government accused the defendant of soliciting violence and inciting harm through his online posts. The case involves potential violations of laws related to intimidation, harassment, hate speech, and incitement to violence.
The most relevant facts to the court's analysis are the nature and content of the defendant's posts, including whether they constitute protected speech or solicitation of violence. The court must also consider whether the defendant's statements present a threat to public safety and violate applicable laws.
United States v. White (2011)
United States District Court for the Northern District of Illinois
779 F. Supp. 2d 775
Learn more about this case at https://www.lsd.law/briefs/view/united-states-v-white-132050542
---
Law School Data has over 50,000 case briefs and a one-of-a-kind brief tool to instantly brief millions of US cases with just the name or case cite.
Check out all of our case briefs: https://www.lsd.law/briefs
Briefs come with built in LSDefine and DeepDive, which allow you to read as quickly or as deeply as you want. Each brief has a built in legal dictionary and recursive summaries that go into more and more detail, until you eventually hit the original case text.
Subscribe for new videos every week: https://www.youtube.com/@LSData?sub_confirmation=1
- published: 16 Aug 2023
- views: 2