Difference between revisions of "Holmes v. South Carolina"

From Conservapedia
Jump to: navigation, search
m
Line 1: Line 1:
−
In '''''Holmes v. South Carolina''''', 547 U.S. 319 (2006), Justice [[Sam Alito]] wrote for a unanimous [[U.S. Supreme Court]] that application of the [[Gregory rule]] by South Carolina to exclude evidence submitted by a criminal [[defendant]] about potential guilt by a third party violates a criminal [[defendant]]'s right to have "'a meaningful opportunity to present a complete defense.'"<ref>''Crane'', 476 U.S. at 690 (quoting  Trombetta, 467 U.S. at 485).</ref>
+
Ah hate dem jews, dey so rich. Mah mommy told me that u get jelus of peeple that hav sumthing you don't have. So Karajou is jelus cause jew are smaart
−
 
+
−
== References ==
+
−
 
+
−
<references/>
+
−
[[category:United States Supreme Court Cases]]
+

Revision as of 21:03, June 9, 2015

Ah hate dem jews, dey so rich. Mah mommy told me that u get jelus of peeple that hav sumthing you don't have. So Karajou is jelus cause jew are smaart

Retrieved from "https://conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Holmes_v._South_Carolina&oldid=1158045"