Talk:Melendez-Diaz v. Massachusetts

Lead
The article lead is currently pretty confusing. It should be written in a more concise and clearer manner (read: smaller words, fewer legal citations). The rest of the article is where you can get into the finer details. :-) --MZMcBride (talk) 13:58, 29 June 2009 (UTC)

"Snitch" in first sentence
I don't think snitch is the proper term for that. Maybe "Informant" would be better? GoogolplexForce (talk) 01:04, 4 April 2011 (UTC)


 * Forgot: if someone doesn't disagree within a week, I'll change it. Feel free to revert me if you've a good reason. GoogolplexForce (talk) 01:05, 4 April 2011 (UTC)

United States v. Kirby (1899)
I've removed the link to United States v. Kirby because the link is to the wrong case - I wasn't able to find an article about the 1899 United States v. Kirby - if there is one, somebody please make a link to the correct article. CruiserBob (talk) 21:47, 8 May 2012 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Melendez-Diaz v. Massachusetts. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20100119044033/http://www.scotusblog.com/argument-analysis-as-kennedy-goes/ to http://www.scotusblog.com/argument-analysis-as-kennedy-goes/

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 02:47, 8 June 2017 (UTC)