CRIMINAL PROCEDUREBOND v

| Table of Forms

Law Journals

| Law Students

| iLaw Dictionar

| News

				United States
				Constitutional Law
				US Supreme Court Case Summaries
				April 17, 2000

US Codes

Federal Rules of Civil Procedure

|California Evidence Code

| California Rules of Court

| Federal Courts

| Lawyers

A Legal and Business Portal-Home Page

War

On Terrorism

Special Report

USA Constitutional Law
Table of Contents: Primary

United States Constitutional Law
United States Supreme
Court Case Summaries
April 17, 2000

United States constitutional Law
United States Supreme Court Case Summaries
April 17, 2000

U.S. Supreme Court Opinions
Case Summaries -April 17, 2000
--------------------------------
TORT LAW

NORFOLK SOUTHERN RAILWAY CO. v. SHANKLIN, individually and as next friend of
SHANKLIN (4/17/00 - No. 99-312)
Certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit
Argued March 1, 2000--Decided April 17, 2000
Respondent's husband was killed when petitioner's train hit his vehicle at a
crossing with advance warning signs and reflectorized crossbucks that the
Tennessee Department of Transportation (TDOT) had installed using federal
funds under the Crossings Program. The signs were installed and fully
compliant with applicable federal standards. Respondent brought a diversity
wrongful death action in federal court, alleging that petitioner was
negligent in, among other things, failing to maintain adequate warning
devices at the crossing.
Held: The Federal Railroad Safety Act of 1970, in conjunction with
§§646.214(b)(3) and (4), pre-empts state tort claims concerning a railroad's
failure to maintain adequate warning devices at crossings where federal
funds have participated in the devices' installation. Nothing prevents a
State from revisiting the adequacy of devices installed using federal funds,
or from installing more protective devices at such crossings with their own
funds or additional Federal Highway Administration funding, but the State
cannot hold the railroad responsible for the adequacy of those devices.
173 F. 3d 386, reversed and remanded.
O'Connor, J., delivered the opinion of the Court, in which Rehnquist, C. J.,
and Scalia, Kennedy, Souter, Thomas, and Breyer, JJ., joined. Breyer, J.,
filed a concurring opinion. Ginsburg, J., filed a dissenting opinion, in
which Stevens, J., joined.
To read the full text of this opinion, go to:
http://laws.findlaw.com/us/000/99-312.html
TORT LAW_NORFOLK SOUTHERN RAILWAY CO. v. SHANKLIN_(4/17/00 - No. 99-312)(FRSA)

CRIMINAL PROCEDURE

BOND v. UNITED STATES (4/17/00 - No. 98-9349)
Certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit
Argued February 29, 2000--Decided April 17, 2000
Border Patrol Agent Cantu boarded a bus in Texas to check the immigration
status of its passengers. As he walked off the bus, he squeezed the soft
luggage, which passengers had placed in the overhead storage space. He
squeezed a canvas bag above petitioner's seat and noticed that it contained
a "brick-like" object. After petitioner admitted owning the bag and
consented to its search, Agent Cantu discovered a "brick" of
methamphetamine. Petitioner was indicted on federal drug charges. He moved
to suppress the drugs, arguing that Agent Cantu conducted an illegal search
of his bag.
Held: Agent Cantu's physical manipulation of petitioner's carry-on bag
violated the Fourth Amendment's proscription against unreasonable searches.
A traveler's personal luggage is clearly an "effect" protected by the
Amendment, see United States v. Place, 462 U. S. 696, 707
http://caselaw.findlaw.com/cgi-bin/getcase.pl?navby=case&court=US&vol=462&in
vol=696&pageno=707, and it is undisputed that petitioner possessed a privacy
interest in his bag.
167 F. 3d 225, reversed.
Rehnquist, C. J., delivered the opinion of the Court, in which Stevens,
O'Connor, Kennedy, Souter, Thomas, and Ginsburg, JJ., joined. Breyer, J.,
filed a dissenting opinion, in which Scalia, J., joined.
To read the full text of this opinion, go to:
http://laws.findlaw.com/us/000/98-9349.html
CRIMINAL PROCEDURE-BOND v. UNITED STATES (4/17/00 - No. 98-9349)
------------------------------------------------------

The following are Direct links to FindLaw Resources
FINDLAW US SUPREME COURT CASE SUMMARIES
http://www.findlaw.com/casecode/supreme.html
FindLaw Law Library - legal guides, memos and briefs
http://library.findlaw.com
FindLaw Professionals
http://profs.findlaw.com/
FindLaw Lawyer Marketing
http://marketing.findlaw.com/
FindLaw Tech Deals
http://techdeals.findlaw.com

_________________________
Have a BEAUTIFUL DAY!!!!!

CRIMINAL PROCEDUREBOND v. UNITED STATES (4/17/00 - No. 98-9349)
U.S. Supreme Court Opinions-Case Summaries - April 17, 2000