What is a "Fourth Circuit"?
969552
It is merely the name of that court,  areas of the nation or states are divided into "circuits" or areas where that court has jurisdiction.\n\nIt comes from the old days when a judge would ride a horse or wagon and travel a "circuit" of varoius court houses.\nSimular to preachers who did a ciruit of churches.\n\nIt merely means the area the court covers as divided by the government
165580
That's the thing. The 4th admendment protects against "unreasonable" searches and seizes, not all searches and seizures unconditionally. Supreme court cases have shown that ... for example, your locker in school can be searched despite the admendment.\n\nI do not believe that any searches prior to getting on an airplane violate the letter, or even the spirit of the law. When you get on an airplane, your rights come secondary to the safety of everyone aboard that plane and the people on the ground who could be harmed if that plane crashes. \n\nThe 4th admendment is to stop the government from knocking down your door and looking for evidence without a warrant. It was from the days where writs of assistance were used to arbitrarily search people's houses.
644320
f4 Means that it's a Felony in the 4th degree, most use it as 4th degree felony \n\nA 5th degree felony is the lowest felony...could be dropped to a misdmeanor...so a felony 4 isn't to terrible.  But, depends on charge, and past criminal record.
153223
Milton D. Korman argued the cause for respondents in No. 4. With him on the brief were Vernon E. West, Chester H. Gray and Lyman J. Umstead. [349 U.S. 294, 297]  \n\nJoseph Donald Craven, Attorney General of Delaware, argued the cause for petitioners in No. 5. On the brief were H. Albert Young, then Attorney General, Clarence W. Taylor, Deputy Attorney General, and Andrew D. Christie, Special Deputy to the Attorney General. \n\nIn response to the Court's invitation, 347 U.S. 483, 495-496, Solicitor General Sobeloff participated in the oral argument for the United States. With him on the brief were Attorney General Brownell, Assistant Attorney General Rankin, Philip Elman, Ralph S. Spritzer and Alan S. Rosenthal.
270992
It is true that the Supreme Court can hear any case it wants. A common type of case they take up is a case involving a legal issue in which two or more of the federal circuit courts have reached different conclusions on the same issue. The Supreme Court will take the case to settle the relieve the conflicting opinions of the circuit courts.
76485
You did not specify whether you were in Texas state court or in federal court.  I have posted a link to the website of the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Texas below and I know they have local rules on that website.\n\nI don't have knowledge of Texas law, but I am an attorney.  In some states, the trial court cannot resume jurisdiction until the appellate court issues something called a remittitur.  This is the official notice to the trial court that appellate opinion is final.  The higher court usually sends back a case and its record to the trial court for further proceedings in accordance with instructions or the decision of the higher court.\n\nI am assuming that the appeal of the third party claimant is not completely dead yet, otherwise the trial court would have acted by now.  Perhaps there is still time for them request a hearing before the full Circuit Court of Appeal or time file a petition for review the the Supreme Court.
108879
Concurring opinion.  \n\nA written opinion by an appellate judge or justice in which the author agrees with the decision of the court but normally states reasons different from those in the court opinion as the basis for his or her decision.\n\nThere are two kinds of concurring. A simple concurring opinion is when some justices join the opinion of the court but also has something else to add. Concurring in judgment means that they agree with the judgement but not the reasoning.
1128005
There are four people involved in every Court hearing - the judge, the clerk, the party (or attorney) on the other side and you.\nEach Court runs by the rules that the judge sets, and they are different in each County, sometimes in each Courtroom.\nIf you go the the website for the county in which the Court is located, there will probably be a link to the Court Clerk, but  don't count on being able to ask for a continuance by e-mail - usually someone has to show up on the scheduled date and time and ask for a continuance in front of the Judge, so the other party has a chance to object. If it is the party to the hearing, that;s OK; if it;s an attorney fro the party to the hearing, that's OK, too; if it's someone else, they run the risk of being accused of practicing law without a license if they appear in Court and speak for the party to the hearing.
204920
The Fourth Amendment protection against "unreasonable searches and seizures" was adopted as a protection against the widespread invasions of privacy experienced by American colonists at the hands of the British Government. So-called "writs of assistance" gave royal officers broad discretion to conduct searches of the homes of private citizens, primarily as a way of discovering violations of strict British customs laws. This practice led to a unique awareness among our Founding Fathers of the threat to individual liberty and privacy that is created by unchecked government search powers.
592119
Litigants are the participants in "litigation." \n\nBasically, the plaintiffs and defendants.
898496
I agree with anne_s.  The federal court system - which is what applies in this case since it is a constitutional issue - is a hierachy with the US Supreme Court at the top.  Then the country is divided into smaller Circuits.  There are 11 circuits.  Within those circuits there are Districts.  The only binding cases are those issued from a higher court.  However, a case decided in one circuit would not be binding on a district court in a different circuit.  Otherwise, the ruling is just persuasive.  Since NY is in the 2nd Circuit and PA is in the 3rd, the NY ruling wouldn't be binding on the 2nd Circuit. BUT, sometimes the US Supreme Court will agree with a circuit court's ruling but not hear the case.  In that situation you might have a circuit court decision that would be binding on other courts because the Supreme Court has approved of their ruling.  It is all very confusing.  Even worse for state courts!!
496802
Protecting the 4th amendment rights is more important.
405479
separate case; standards for being awarded a prelim. injunction are different
612601
Questions about law serve to remind me that I don't know as much about the law as I should. I'm guessing #4 is correct; but it's just a guess.
31224
Supreme Court 526 U.S. 314\nUS Court of Appeals for the third circuit 122 F.3d 185\nUnited States District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania. (D.C. No. 94-cr-00159-14).\n\nOne more. After it went all the way up to the supreme ct, it went back down to be retried based on the supreme ct's findings:\n\nUNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE THIRD CIRCUIT \n187 F.3d 331\n\nAnd finally, remanded back to the Pa District Ct, though I can't find a case number for that
433201
A warrant issued by a federal court or jurisdiction (as opposed to a state or local court).
177651
Here is the oversimplified version: \n\nSuperior/District court (verdict) --> State Court of Appeals/Federal Circuit Court of Appeals --> State Supreme Court/U.S. Supreme Court\n\nSometimes (as in criminal cases), a convicted person can exhaust direct state appeals, then move on to federal appeals (habeas corpus).