-
US Route 45 (Illinois) South (Preview Sections) (Libertyville To Des Plaines)
Tour Of US 45 South in Illinois in Libertyville from Casey Rd to Central Rd in Des Plaines.
published: 24 Jul 2021
-
US 45
Trip down US 45 from Michigan to Alabama in 2011
published: 08 May 2016
-
US Route 45 (Illinois To Wisconsin) Night Drive - Mundelein To Bristol
Heading north on US 45 North from Mundelein, IL to Wisconsin Route 50 in Bristol, Wisconsin.
published: 17 Jul 2021
-
U.S. Route 45 Millburn Bypass Project Nears Completion
Local officials recently gathered to celebrate the opening of the US Route 45 Millburn Bypass in north-central Lake County (IL). This $31 million project improved Route 45 from IL 132 to IL 173 and created a bypass of the Millburn Historic District, addressing one of the most congested traffic spots in Lake County, hence its nickname “the Millburn Strangler.” Watch this video to learn more.
published: 28 Oct 2019
-
U.S. Route 45 (Alabama) | Wikipedia audio article
This is an audio version of the Wikipedia Article:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/U.S._Route_45
00:01:09 1 Route description
00:01:18 1.1 Alabama
00:01:47 1.2 Mississippi
00:03:20 1.3 Tennessee
00:04:35 1.4 Kentucky
00:05:17 1.5 Illinois
00:06:18 1.6 Wisconsin
00:07:05 1.7 Michigan
00:07:47 1.8 Historic termini
00:08:24 2 Major intersections
00:13:45 3 See also
Listening is a more natural way of learning, when compared to reading. Written language only began at around 3200 BC, but spoken language has existed long ago.
Learning by listening is a great way to:
- increases imagination and understanding
- improves your listening skills
- improves your own spoken accent
- learn while on the move
- reduce eye strain
Now learn the vast amount of general knowledge available o...
published: 31 Dec 2018
-
[IL] US 45 SB from Third Lake to Grayslake (Aug 2016)
ROUTE PATH: https://www.google.com/maps/dir/42.3866331,-88.0042159/42.3389392,-88.0047546/@42.3593013,-88.0307316,13.21z
DATE: 29 August 2016
DISTANCE: 3.5 mi (5.6 km)
ROAD(S): US Route 45
LOCATIONS: Third Lake, IL; Gurnee, IL; Grayslake, IL
CAMERA: Nikon D5100 DSLR with AF-S DX NIKKOR 18-140mm f/3.5-5.6G ED VR lens
published: 30 Aug 2016
-
Des Plaines River Rd/River Rd/US Route 45 - Southbound
Des Plaines River Rd/River Rd is a north-south road in the suburbs of Cook County. It connects to all the major state roads leading to the western suburbs and travels along the roads leading into the city of Chicago.
We are traveling Southbound from where we pick up the road at Illinois Route 21 - Milwaukee Ave in Northbrook to the end where is concludes at Illinois Route 171 1st Ave in River Grove.
published: 19 May 2021
-
2024 05 19 03 United State Route 45, Illinois
https://ameblo.jp/bokenyaro1994
published: 17 Oct 2024
-
400Xツーリング 『歴史と絶景の佐渡島へ』3泊4日の絶景と自然を満喫するバイク旅
400Xで3泊4日の佐渡島キャンプツーリングに行ってきました。
福島県郡山市を出発し、新潟港からフェリーで佐渡島へ。
佐渡島の島内では、バイクで絶景ポイントを巡り、キャンプ場で過ごす時間も大いに楽しみました。
帰路では、志賀草津高原ルートを走り、横手山や毛無峠の絶景を堪能。
標高の高い場所で感じる爽やかな空気と広がる景色は、まさにツーリングの締めくくりにふさわしいものでした。
これから旅を計画する方へツーリングルートや各種料金等参考にしてもらえれば幸いです。
●今回のルートはこちら
https://www.google.com/maps/d/edit?mid=1YARK9BYHbUoTZm5K8Gtpn8XNCEfd0fo&usp=sharing
●佐渡島キャンプ動画はこちら
https://youtu.be/wZQ17OJO15E?si=hRcWhaEEfjQ1P2Yl
●チャプター----------------------------------------------
00:00 coming up...
00:34 8月10日ルート紹介
01:01 福島県郡山市から出発
04:46 新潟港フェリーターミナル
06:14 8月10日ルート紹介(佐渡島)
07:30 トキの森公園
08:41 大佐渡スカイライン
09:43 大佐渡スカイライン展望台
11:41 寿司民宿長浜荘
12:45 8月11日ルート紹介
13:50 妙宣寺五重塔
16:56 二ツ亀キャンプ場
17:52 8月12日ルート紹介
18:59 大野亀
20:51 ドンデン線
21:53 ドンデン山展望台
24:50 素浜キャンプ場
25:52 8月13日ルート紹介
26:43 小木港
28:52 8月13日ルート紹介(本州)
30:09 銭形高田分店
31:57 志賀草津高原ルート
33:0...
published: 23 Oct 2024
-
WV Route 45 East from Interstate 81 to U.S. 11 Streetlights (March 23, 2022)
published: 02 Jun 2022
26:06
US Route 45 (Illinois) South (Preview Sections) (Libertyville To Des Plaines)
Tour Of US 45 South in Illinois in Libertyville from Casey Rd to Central Rd in Des Plaines.
Tour Of US 45 South in Illinois in Libertyville from Casey Rd to Central Rd in Des Plaines.
https://wn.com/US_Route_45_(Illinois)_South_(Preview_Sections)_(Libertyville_To_Des_Plaines)
Tour Of US 45 South in Illinois in Libertyville from Casey Rd to Central Rd in Des Plaines.
- published: 24 Jul 2021
- views: 1802
32:46
US Route 45 (Illinois To Wisconsin) Night Drive - Mundelein To Bristol
Heading north on US 45 North from Mundelein, IL to Wisconsin Route 50 in Bristol, Wisconsin.
Heading north on US 45 North from Mundelein, IL to Wisconsin Route 50 in Bristol, Wisconsin.
https://wn.com/US_Route_45_(Illinois_To_Wisconsin)_Night_Drive_Mundelein_To_Bristol
Heading north on US 45 North from Mundelein, IL to Wisconsin Route 50 in Bristol, Wisconsin.
- published: 17 Jul 2021
- views: 442
1:36
U.S. Route 45 Millburn Bypass Project Nears Completion
Local officials recently gathered to celebrate the opening of the US Route 45 Millburn Bypass in north-central Lake County (IL). This $31 million project improv...
Local officials recently gathered to celebrate the opening of the US Route 45 Millburn Bypass in north-central Lake County (IL). This $31 million project improved Route 45 from IL 132 to IL 173 and created a bypass of the Millburn Historic District, addressing one of the most congested traffic spots in Lake County, hence its nickname “the Millburn Strangler.” Watch this video to learn more.
https://wn.com/U.S._Route_45_Millburn_Bypass_Project_Nears_Completion
Local officials recently gathered to celebrate the opening of the US Route 45 Millburn Bypass in north-central Lake County (IL). This $31 million project improved Route 45 from IL 132 to IL 173 and created a bypass of the Millburn Historic District, addressing one of the most congested traffic spots in Lake County, hence its nickname “the Millburn Strangler.” Watch this video to learn more.
- published: 28 Oct 2019
- views: 417
14:45
U.S. Route 45 (Alabama) | Wikipedia audio article
This is an audio version of the Wikipedia Article:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/U.S._Route_45
00:01:09 1 Route description
00:01:18 1.1
Alabama
00:01:47 ...
This is an audio version of the Wikipedia Article:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/U.S._Route_45
00:01:09 1 Route description
00:01:18 1.1
Alabama
00:01:47 1.2 Mississippi
00:03:20 1.3 Tennessee
00:04:35 1.4 Kentucky
00:05:17 1.5 Illinois
00:06:18 1.6 Wisconsin
00:07:05 1.7 Michigan
00:07:47 1.8 Historic termini
00:08:24 2 Major intersections
00:13:45 3 See also
Listening is a more natural way of learning, when compared to reading. Written language only began at around 3200 BC, but spoken language has existed long ago.
Learning by listening is a great way to:
- increases imagination and understanding
- improves your listening skills
- improves your own spoken accent
- learn while on the move
- reduce eye strain
Now learn the vast amount of general knowledge available on Wikipedia through audio (audio article). You could even learn subconsciously by playing the audio while you are sleeping! If you are planning to listen a lot, you could try using a bone conduction headphone, or a standard speaker instead of an earphone.
Listen on Google Assistant through Extra Audio:
https://assistant.google.com/services/invoke/uid/0000001a130b3f91
Other Wikipedia audio articles at:
https://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=wikipedia+tts
Upload your own Wikipedia articles through:
https://github.com/nodef/wikipedia-tts
Speaking Rate: 0.8550509046799596
Voice name: en-US-Wavenet-E
"I cannot teach anybody anything, I can only make them think."
- Socrates
SUMMARY
=======
U.S. Route 45 is a major north–south United States highway and a border-to-border route, from Lake Superior to the Gulf of Mexico. A sign at the highway's northern terminus notes the total distance as 1,300 miles (2,100 km).
US 45 is notable for incorporating, in its maiden alignment, the first paved road in the South, a 49-mile segment in Lee County, Mississippi. Let to contract in July 1914, the concrete highway opened on November 15, 1915.As of 2006, the highway's northern terminus is in Ontonagon, Michigan, at the corner of Ontonagon and River Streets, a few blocks from Lake Superior. M-64 formerly terminated there as well until its rerouting in October 2006 to use the newly built Ontonagon River Bridge. Its southern terminus is in Mobile, Alabama, at an intersection with U.S. Route 98.
https://wn.com/U.S._Route_45_(Alabama)_|_Wikipedia_Audio_Article
This is an audio version of the Wikipedia Article:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/U.S._Route_45
00:01:09 1 Route description
00:01:18 1.1
Alabama
00:01:47 1.2 Mississippi
00:03:20 1.3 Tennessee
00:04:35 1.4 Kentucky
00:05:17 1.5 Illinois
00:06:18 1.6 Wisconsin
00:07:05 1.7 Michigan
00:07:47 1.8 Historic termini
00:08:24 2 Major intersections
00:13:45 3 See also
Listening is a more natural way of learning, when compared to reading. Written language only began at around 3200 BC, but spoken language has existed long ago.
Learning by listening is a great way to:
- increases imagination and understanding
- improves your listening skills
- improves your own spoken accent
- learn while on the move
- reduce eye strain
Now learn the vast amount of general knowledge available on Wikipedia through audio (audio article). You could even learn subconsciously by playing the audio while you are sleeping! If you are planning to listen a lot, you could try using a bone conduction headphone, or a standard speaker instead of an earphone.
Listen on Google Assistant through Extra Audio:
https://assistant.google.com/services/invoke/uid/0000001a130b3f91
Other Wikipedia audio articles at:
https://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=wikipedia+tts
Upload your own Wikipedia articles through:
https://github.com/nodef/wikipedia-tts
Speaking Rate: 0.8550509046799596
Voice name: en-US-Wavenet-E
"I cannot teach anybody anything, I can only make them think."
- Socrates
SUMMARY
=======
U.S. Route 45 is a major north–south United States highway and a border-to-border route, from Lake Superior to the Gulf of Mexico. A sign at the highway's northern terminus notes the total distance as 1,300 miles (2,100 km).
US 45 is notable for incorporating, in its maiden alignment, the first paved road in the South, a 49-mile segment in Lee County, Mississippi. Let to contract in July 1914, the concrete highway opened on November 15, 1915.As of 2006, the highway's northern terminus is in Ontonagon, Michigan, at the corner of Ontonagon and River Streets, a few blocks from Lake Superior. M-64 formerly terminated there as well until its rerouting in October 2006 to use the newly built Ontonagon River Bridge. Its southern terminus is in Mobile, Alabama, at an intersection with U.S. Route 98.
- published: 31 Dec 2018
- views: 143
8:18
[IL] US 45 SB from Third Lake to Grayslake (Aug 2016)
ROUTE PATH: https://www.google.com/maps/dir/42.3866331,-88.0042159/42.3389392,-88.0047546/@42.3593013,-88.0307316,13.21z
DATE: 29 August 2016
DISTANCE: 3.5 mi (...
ROUTE PATH: https://www.google.com/maps/dir/42.3866331,-88.0042159/42.3389392,-88.0047546/@42.3593013,-88.0307316,13.21z
DATE: 29 August 2016
DISTANCE: 3.5 mi (5.6 km)
ROAD(S): US Route 45
LOCATIONS: Third Lake, IL; Gurnee, IL; Grayslake, IL
CAMERA: Nikon D5100 DSLR with AF-S DX NIKKOR 18-140mm f/3.5-5.6G ED VR lens
https://wn.com/Il_US_45_Sb_From_Third_Lake_To_Grayslake_(Aug_2016)
ROUTE PATH: https://www.google.com/maps/dir/42.3866331,-88.0042159/42.3389392,-88.0047546/@42.3593013,-88.0307316,13.21z
DATE: 29 August 2016
DISTANCE: 3.5 mi (5.6 km)
ROAD(S): US Route 45
LOCATIONS: Third Lake, IL; Gurnee, IL; Grayslake, IL
CAMERA: Nikon D5100 DSLR with AF-S DX NIKKOR 18-140mm f/3.5-5.6G ED VR lens
- published: 30 Aug 2016
- views: 258
24:26
Des Plaines River Rd/River Rd/US Route 45 - Southbound
Des Plaines River Rd/River Rd is a north-south road in the suburbs of Cook County. It connects to all the major state roads leading to the western suburbs and t...
Des Plaines River Rd/River Rd is a north-south road in the suburbs of Cook County. It connects to all the major state roads leading to the western suburbs and travels along the roads leading into the city of Chicago.
We are traveling Southbound from where we pick up the road at Illinois Route 21 - Milwaukee Ave in Northbrook to the end where is concludes at Illinois Route 171 1st Ave in River Grove.
https://wn.com/Des_Plaines_River_Rd_River_Rd_US_Route_45_Southbound
Des Plaines River Rd/River Rd is a north-south road in the suburbs of Cook County. It connects to all the major state roads leading to the western suburbs and travels along the roads leading into the city of Chicago.
We are traveling Southbound from where we pick up the road at Illinois Route 21 - Milwaukee Ave in Northbrook to the end where is concludes at Illinois Route 171 1st Ave in River Grove.
- published: 19 May 2021
- views: 1082
38:19
400Xツーリング 『歴史と絶景の佐渡島へ』3泊4日の絶景と自然を満喫するバイク旅
400Xで3泊4日の佐渡島キャンプツーリングに行ってきました。
福島県郡山市を出発し、新潟港からフェリーで佐渡島へ。
佐渡島の島内では、バイクで絶景ポイントを巡り、キャンプ場で過ごす時間も大いに楽しみました。
帰路では、志賀草津高原ルートを走り、横手山や毛無峠の絶景を堪能。
標高の高い場所で感じる爽やかな空気と広がる景...
400Xで3泊4日の佐渡島キャンプツーリングに行ってきました。
福島県郡山市を出発し、新潟港からフェリーで佐渡島へ。
佐渡島の島内では、バイクで絶景ポイントを巡り、キャンプ場で過ごす時間も大いに楽しみました。
帰路では、志賀草津高原ルートを走り、横手山や毛無峠の絶景を堪能。
標高の高い場所で感じる爽やかな空気と広がる景色は、まさにツーリングの締めくくりにふさわしいものでした。
これから旅を計画する方へツーリングルートや各種料金等参考にしてもらえれば幸いです。
●今回のルートはこちら
https://www.google.com/maps/d/edit?mid=1YARK9BYHbUoTZm5K8Gtpn8XNCEfd0fo&usp=sharing
●佐渡島キャンプ動画はこちら
https://youtu.be/wZQ17OJO15E?si=hRcWhaEEfjQ1P2Yl
●チャプター----------------------------------------------
00:00 coming up...
00:34 8月10日ルート紹介
01:01 福島県郡山市から出発
04:46 新潟港フェリーターミナル
06:14 8月10日ルート紹介(佐渡島)
07:30 トキの森公園
08:41 大佐渡スカイライン
09:43 大佐渡スカイライン展望台
11:41 寿司民宿長浜荘
12:45 8月11日ルート紹介
13:50 妙宣寺五重塔
16:56 二ツ亀キャンプ場
17:52 8月12日ルート紹介
18:59 大野亀
20:51 ドンデン線
21:53 ドンデン山展望台
24:50 素浜キャンプ場
25:52 8月13日ルート紹介
26:43 小木港
28:52 8月13日ルート紹介(本州)
30:09 銭形高田分店
31:57 志賀草津高原ルート
33:04 横手山ドライブイン
35:13 毛無峠
36:59 ツーリングデータ
●SNS----------------------------------------------
Instagram
https://www.instagram.com/taichi_vvv/
https://www.instagram.com/motolifez_t/
Twitter
https://mobile.twitter.com/TaichiVR
#400X #佐渡島 #キャンプツーリング #CB500X #honda
https://wn.com/400Xツーリング_『歴史と絶景の佐渡島へ』3泊4日の絶景と自然を満喫するバイク旅
400Xで3泊4日の佐渡島キャンプツーリングに行ってきました。
福島県郡山市を出発し、新潟港からフェリーで佐渡島へ。
佐渡島の島内では、バイクで絶景ポイントを巡り、キャンプ場で過ごす時間も大いに楽しみました。
帰路では、志賀草津高原ルートを走り、横手山や毛無峠の絶景を堪能。
標高の高い場所で感じる爽やかな空気と広がる景色は、まさにツーリングの締めくくりにふさわしいものでした。
これから旅を計画する方へツーリングルートや各種料金等参考にしてもらえれば幸いです。
●今回のルートはこちら
https://www.google.com/maps/d/edit?mid=1YARK9BYHbUoTZm5K8Gtpn8XNCEfd0fo&usp=sharing
●佐渡島キャンプ動画はこちら
https://youtu.be/wZQ17OJO15E?si=hRcWhaEEfjQ1P2Yl
●チャプター----------------------------------------------
00:00 coming up...
00:34 8月10日ルート紹介
01:01 福島県郡山市から出発
04:46 新潟港フェリーターミナル
06:14 8月10日ルート紹介(佐渡島)
07:30 トキの森公園
08:41 大佐渡スカイライン
09:43 大佐渡スカイライン展望台
11:41 寿司民宿長浜荘
12:45 8月11日ルート紹介
13:50 妙宣寺五重塔
16:56 二ツ亀キャンプ場
17:52 8月12日ルート紹介
18:59 大野亀
20:51 ドンデン線
21:53 ドンデン山展望台
24:50 素浜キャンプ場
25:52 8月13日ルート紹介
26:43 小木港
28:52 8月13日ルート紹介(本州)
30:09 銭形高田分店
31:57 志賀草津高原ルート
33:04 横手山ドライブイン
35:13 毛無峠
36:59 ツーリングデータ
●SNS----------------------------------------------
Instagram
https://www.instagram.com/taichi_vvv/
https://www.instagram.com/motolifez_t/
Twitter
https://mobile.twitter.com/TaichiVR
#400X #佐渡島 #キャンプツーリング #CB500X #honda
- published: 23 Oct 2024
- views: 450
-
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