UNITED STATES

v.

NAVAJO NATION

Citator

Cited By

• State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co. v. Campbell, 538 U.S. 408 (U.S. 2003)
  …us civil and criminal penalties State Farm could have faced, including $10,000 for each act of fraud, the suspension of its license to conduct business in Utah, the disgorgement of profits, and imprisonment. Id., at 1154-1155. We granted certiorari. 535 U. S. 1111 (2002). II We recognized in Cooper Industries, Inc. v. Leatherman Tool Group, Inc., 532 U. S. 424 (2001), that in our judicial system compensatory and punitive damages, although usually awarded at the same time by the same decisionmaker, serve dif…
• United States v. Jernigan, 341 F.3d 1273 (11th Cir. 2003)
  …the denial of a motion for a new trial based on newly discovered evidence for abuse of discretion. See United States v. Hansen, 262 F. 3d 1217, 1236 (11th Cir.2001) (citing United States v. Pistone, 177 F. 3d 957, 958 (11th Cir.1999)), cert. denied 535 U.S. 1111, 122 S.Ct. 2326, 153 L.Ed.2d 158 (2002). As we observed in United States v. Ramos-. To succeed on a motion for new trial based on newly discovered evidence, the movant must establish that (1) the evidence was discovered after trial, (2) the failur…
• Chavez v. Martinez, 538 U.S. 760 (U.S. 2003)
  …officer “would have known that persistent interrogation of the suspect despite repeated requests to stop violated the suspect [*766]’s Fifth and Fourteenth Amendment right to be free from coercive interrogation.” Id., at 858. We granted certiorari. 535 U. S. 1111 (2002). !={ In deciding whether an officer is entitled to qualified immunity, we must first determine whether the officer’s alleged conduct violated a constitutional right. See Katz, 533 U. S., at 201. If not, the officer is entitled to qualified…