Teofilo Medina, Jr. v. California
505 U.S. 437 · Decided June 22, 1992 · Supreme Court of the United States
Record summary. This page is generated from the Supreme Court Database’s coded data about the case. It describes who decided what, not the Court’s reasoning. Read the opinion itself before relying on it. Not legal advice.
At a glance
Teofilo Medina, Jr. v. California was decided on June 22, 1992 by a vote of 7–2. The Court affirmed the lower court's decision. Justice Anthony M. Kennedy wrote the opinion of the Court. SCDB classifies its main issue as “Due process, miscellaneous” in the Due Process area.
Read the opinion
Case details
- Citations
- 505 U.S. 437 · 112 S. Ct. 2572 · 120 L. Ed. 2d 353 · 1992 U.S. LEXIS 3696
- Docket number
- 90-8370
- Decided
- June 22, 1992
- Argued
- February 25, 1992
- Court era
- Rehnquist Court
- Decision type
- Opinion of the Court (orally argued)
- Disposition
- Affirmed
- Outcome for petitioner
- The petitioning party did not receive a favorable disposition
- Vote
- 7–2
- Majority opinion
- Anthony M. Kennedy
- Opinion assigned by
- William H. Rehnquist
- How the case arrived
- Certiorari
- Issue (SCDB)
- Due process, miscellaneous
- Issue area
- Due Process
- Legal provision
- Fourteenth Amendment (due process)
- Type of law
- Constitutional amendment
- Decision direction (SCDB)
- Conservative what this means
How the Justices voted
| Justice | Vote | Separate writing |
|---|---|---|
| Justice Byron R. White | Majority | |
| Justice Harry A. Blackmun | Dissent | Wrote an opinion |
| Chief Justice William H. Rehnquist | Majority | |
| Justice John Paul Stevens | Dissent | |
| Justice Sandra Day O'Connor | Special concurrence | Wrote an opinion |
| Justice Antonin Scalia | Majority | |
| Justice Anthony M. Kennedy | Majority | Wrote an opinion |
| Justice David H. Souter | Special concurrence | |
| Justice Clarence Thomas | Majority |
Full case caption
Teofilo Medina, Jr. v. California
SCDB identifiers: case 1991-106, docket 1991-106-01.
Related decisions
Other cases on “Due process, miscellaneous”
- Terry Foucha v. LouisianaLaw held unconstitutional
- Diane Griffin v. United States
- Edward Harold Schad, Jr. v. Arizona
- Leonard Heller v. Samuel Doe
- Michael H. v. Gerald D.
- Arizona v. Youngblood
Cases on the same legal provision: Fourteenth Amendment (due process)
- Derrick Morgan v. Illinois
- Planned Parenthood of Southeastern Pennsylvania v. Robert P. Casey, Etc.Altered precedentLaw held unconstitutional
- Quill Corporation v. North Dakota by and Through Its Tax CommissionerAltered precedentLaw held unconstitutional
- Al C. Parke v. Ricky Harold Raley
- Wayne Estelle v. Mark Owen McGuire
- Leonel Torres Herrera v. James A. Collins
Same Term, same area (Due Process)
- Diane Griffin v. United States
- Robert C. Rufo v. Inmates of the Suffolk County Jail
- John K. Yee v. City of Escondido
- Terry Foucha v. LouisianaLaw held unconstitutional
- David H. Lucas v. South Carolina Coastal Council
Source: Supreme Court Database, 2026 Release 01 (data file dated September 8, 2026). Imported into CaseTrail November 5, 2026. Coverage: decisions from the 1946 through 2025 Terms. Methodology · Report an error