翻訳と辞書 Words near each other ・ United States v. Williams (disambiguation) ・ United States v. Manning ・ United States v. Marcum ・ United States v. Martinez-Fuerte ・ United States v. Matlock ・ United States v. McBratney ・ United States v. Mead Corp. ・ United States v. Mendenhall ・ United States v. Microsoft Corp. ・ United States v. Miller ・ United States v. Mitchell ・ United States v. Mitchell (1983) ・ United States v. Montgomery County Board of Education ・ United States v. Montoya De Hernandez ・ United States v. Moore ・ United States v. More ・ United States v. Moreland ・ United States v. Morgan ・ United States v. Morlang ・ United States v. Morris ・ United States v. Morris (1991) ・ United States v. Morrison ・ United States v. Mueller ・ United States v. Munoz-Flores ・ United States v. National Treasury Employees Union ・ United States v. Navajo Nation ・ United States v. Navajo Nation (2009) ・ United States v. Nice ・ United States v. Ninety-Five Barrels Alleged Apple Cider Vinegar ・ United States v. Nixon Dictionary Lists mini英和辞書 mini和英辞書 Webster 1913 Latin-English FOLDOC Wikipedia English ウィキペディア

翻訳と辞書　辞書検索 [ 開発暫定版 ] スポンサード リンク United States v. More ： ウィキペディア英語版 United States v. More ''United States v. More'', , was a United States Supreme Court case in which the Court held that it had no jurisdiction to hear appeals from criminal cases in the circuit courts by writs of error. Relying on the Exceptions Clause, ''More'' held that Congress's enumerated grants of appellate jurisdiction to the Court operated as an exercise of Congress's power to eliminate all other forms of appellate jurisdiction. The second of forty-one criminal cases heard by the Marshall Court, ''More'' ensured that the Court's criminal jurisprudence would be limited to writs of error from the state (and later, territorial) courts, original habeas petitions and writs of error from habeas petitions in the circuit courts, and certificates of division and mandamus from the circuit courts. Congress did not grant the Court jurisdiction to hear writs of error from the circuit courts in criminal cases until 1889, for capital crimes, and 1891, for other "infamous" crimes.〔 The Judicial Code of 1911 abolished the circuit courts, transferred the trial of crimes to the district courts, and extended the Court's appellate jurisdiction to all crimes.〔Brent D. Stratton, ''Criminal Law: The Attenuation Exception to the Exclusionary Rule: A Study in Attenuated Principle and Dissipated Logic'', 75 139, 139 n.1 (1984).〕 But, these statutory grants were construed not to permit writs of error filed by the prosecution, as in ''More''.〔Rossman, 1990, at 524 n.19 (citing United States v. Sanges, 144 U.S. 310 (1892)).〕 ''More'' arose from the same Federalist/Jeffersonian political dispute over the judiciary that gave rise to ''Marbury v. Madison'' (1803) and ''Stuart v. Laird'' (1803). Benjamin More, a justice of the peace in the District of Columbia, argued that the repeal of statutory provisions authorizing compensation for his office violated the salary-protection guarantees for federal judges in Article Three of the United States Constitution. Below, a divided panel of the United States Circuit Court of the District of Columbia had sided with More, interpreted the repeal act prospectively, and sustained his demurrer to the criminal indictment for the common law crime of exacting illegal fees under color of office. ==Background== 抄文引用元・出典: フリー百科事典『 ウィキペディア（Wikipedia）』 ■ウィキペディアで「United States v. More」の詳細全文を読む スポンサード リンク 翻訳と辞書 : 翻訳のためのインターネットリソース Copyright(C) kotoba.ne.jp 1997-2016. All Rights Reserved.