Source: https://stus.com/Tennessee-v-Garner-cartoon-crl0060
Timestamp: 2019-04-19 04:19:12+00:00

Document:
Deadly force; Fourth Amendment. Officers may not use deadly force to prevent the escape of a felony suspect unless officer has probable cause that suspect presents a threat to the life or safety of the officer or others. Seizure.
Whitney v. California; A state may pursuant to police powers punish utterances or joining a group inimical to the public welfare as inciting crime, disturbing the public peace, or threatening the unlawful overthrow of organized governments.
Branzburg v. Hayes; The First Amendment freedom of the press does not protect news reporters from the obligation to testify before a grand jury.
Church of the Lukumi Babalu Aye v. City of Hialeah; Laws that restrict freedom of religious practice that are not of general application must be narrowly tailored to achieve an important and compelling governmental objective.
Edwards v. Aguillard; A law that promotes a particular religious doctrine in the public schools violates the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment.
Commonwealth v. Levesque; criminal liability is possible for failure to alleviate risk that the defendant created.
District Attorney's Office for the Third Judicial District v. Osborne; exonerating DNA testing; no post-conviction constitutional right to access DNA evidence; due process.
Pleasant Grove City, Utah v. Summum; park is a traditional public forum, but the display of a monument is not expression to which forum analysis applies, and instead is a form of government speech not subject to Free Speech strict scrutiny.
Chaplinsky v. New Hampshire; name-calling, epithets, personal abuse are not protected by the First Amendment; Constitution will not protect fighting words or hate speech; incite violence.
Collin v. Smith; neo-Nazi group may parade through Holocaust survivor town; Free Speech; peaceful expression of unpopular or racist views; ACLU; content-based restriction legislation.
New York v. Ferber; adult books and adult videos with children are not protected by the First Amendment or Free Speech; no redeeming value and obscenity standard does not apply; sexual exploitation of minors.
Commonwealth v. Roebuck; An accomplice is accountable for contributing to criminal conduct to the degree his culpability equals what is required to support liability of a principal actor.
United States v. Bernard Madoff; While the court must give the sentencing guideline range fair and respectful consideration, it is not bound by it and must make an individualized sentencing assessment.

References: v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v.