United States v. Munoz-Flores
E285905
United States v. Munoz-Flores is a 1990 U.S. Supreme Court case that addressed whether a federal statute imposing monetary assessments on convicted offenders violated the Constitution’s Origination Clause.
All labels observed (2)
| Label | Occurrences |
|---|---|
| United States v. Humberto Munoz-Flores | 1 |
| United States v. Munoz-Flores canonical | 1 |
How this entity was disambiguated
This entity first appeared as the object of triple T2652727 — resolving that mention is where its identity was fixed. The disambiguator weighed these candidate entities and picked the highlighted one (or “None”, minting a new entity). This is how homonymy is resolved: the same surface form can point to different entities.
NED1
Entity disambiguation (via context triple)
gpt-5-mini-2025-08-07
Target entity: United States v. Munoz-Flores Context triple: [Origination Clause, hasBeenLitigatedIn, United States v. Munoz-Flores]
-
A.
United States v. Eichman
United States v. Eichman is a 1990 U.S. Supreme Court case that struck down a federal law banning flag desecration as unconstitutional under the First Amendment’s protection of free speech.
-
B.
United States v. Leon
United States v. Leon is a 1984 U.S. Supreme Court decision that established the "good faith" exception to the exclusionary rule in Fourth Amendment search and seizure cases.
-
C.
United States v. Guest
United States v. Guest is a 1966 U.S. Supreme Court case that held the federal government can prosecute private conspiracies to interfere with constitutional rights, particularly the right to travel, under certain circumstances.
-
D.
Escobedo v. Illinois
Escobedo v. Illinois is a landmark 1964 U.S. Supreme Court case that expanded the Sixth Amendment right to counsel during police interrogations and helped lay the groundwork for the later Miranda warnings.
-
E.
United States v. Gratiot
United States v. Gratiot is an 1840 U.S. Supreme Court case that upheld broad federal authority over public lands under the Constitution’s Property Clause.
- F. None of above. chosen
- G. Unsure - the case is ambiguous/there is not enough information to decide.
NED2
Entity disambiguation (via description)
gpt-5-mini-2025-08-07
Target entity: United States v. Munoz-Flores Target entity description: United States v. Munoz-Flores is a 1990 U.S. Supreme Court case that addressed whether a federal statute imposing monetary assessments on convicted offenders violated the Constitution’s Origination Clause.
-
A.
United States v. Eichman
United States v. Eichman is a 1990 U.S. Supreme Court case that struck down a federal law banning flag desecration as unconstitutional under the First Amendment’s protection of free speech.
-
B.
United States v. Leon
United States v. Leon is a 1984 U.S. Supreme Court decision that established the "good faith" exception to the exclusionary rule in Fourth Amendment search and seizure cases.
-
C.
United States v. Guest
United States v. Guest is a 1966 U.S. Supreme Court case that held the federal government can prosecute private conspiracies to interfere with constitutional rights, particularly the right to travel, under certain circumstances.
-
D.
Escobedo v. Illinois
Escobedo v. Illinois is a landmark 1964 U.S. Supreme Court case that expanded the Sixth Amendment right to counsel during police interrogations and helped lay the groundwork for the later Miranda warnings.
-
E.
United States v. Gratiot
United States v. Gratiot is an 1840 U.S. Supreme Court case that upheld broad federal authority over public lands under the Constitution’s Property Clause.
- F. None of above. chosen
Statements (47)
| Predicate | Object |
|---|---|
| instanceOf |
United States Supreme Court case
ⓘ
legal case ⓘ |
| areaOfLaw |
constitutional law
ⓘ
federal courts ⓘ separation of powers ⓘ |
| arguedDate | 1989-10-02 ⓘ |
| citation |
109 L. Ed. 2d 384
ⓘ
110 S. Ct. 1964 ⓘ 495 U.S. 385 ⓘ |
| concurrenceBy |
Antonin Scalia
ⓘ
William H. Rehnquist ⓘ |
| constitutionalProvisionInterpreted |
Article I, Section 7 of the United States Constitution
ⓘ
surface form:
Article I, Section 7, Clause 1 of the United States Constitution
|
| country |
United States of America
ⓘ
surface form:
United States
|
| court | Supreme Court of the United States ⓘ |
| decisionDate | 1990-05-21 ⓘ |
| decisionType | majority opinion with concurrences ⓘ |
| docketNumber | 88-1932 ⓘ |
| fullCaseName |
United States v. Munoz-Flores
self-linksurface differs
ⓘ
surface form:
United States v. Humberto Munoz-Flores
|
| holding |
Courts may adjudicate Origination Clause challenges to federal statutes
ⓘ
The statute at issue did not violate the Origination Clause because it was not a bill for raising revenue ⓘ |
| impact | clarified that not all statutes generating revenue are bills for raising revenue under the Origination Clause ⓘ |
| joinedByInMajority |
Anthony M. Kennedy
ⓘ
Byron R. White ⓘ Harry A. Blackmun ⓘ John Paul Stevens ⓘ Sandra Day O’Connor ⓘ William J. Brennan Jr. ⓘ |
| jurisdiction | federal ⓘ |
| languageOfProceeding | English ⓘ |
| legalIssue |
Origination Clause
ⓘ
surface form:
Origination Clause of the United States Constitution
whether a statute imposing monetary assessments on convicted offenders is a bill for raising revenue ⓘ |
| majorityOpinionBy | Thurgood Marshall ⓘ |
| originatingCourt | United States District Court for the Southern District of California ⓘ |
| petitioner |
United States of America
ⓘ
surface form:
United States
|
| precedentStatus | binding on lower federal courts ⓘ |
| publicationStatus | officially reported decision ⓘ |
| relatedConcept |
bills for raising revenue
ⓘ
criminal monetary assessments ⓘ justiciability of constitutional challenges ⓘ |
| respondent | Humberto Munoz-Flores ⓘ |
| result | judgment of the lower court was affirmed in part and reversed in part ⓘ |
| reviewedCourt | United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit ⓘ |
| shortName | Munoz-Flores ⓘ |
| statuteInvolved | 18 U.S.C. § 3013 ⓘ |
| subjectMatter | constitutionality of federal criminal assessment statute ⓘ |
| yearArgued | 1989 ⓘ |
| yearDecided | 1990 ⓘ |
How these facts were elicited
The pipeline generated the facts above by prompting gpt-5.1 with this entity's name + description and the instruction below.
Instruction
You are a knowledge base construction expert. Given a subject entity and a description of it, return factual statements that you know for the subject as a JSON list of dictionaries(triples), where keys must be "subject", "predicate" and "object". The number of facts may be very high, between 25 to 50 or more, for very popular subjects. For less popular subjects, the number of facts can be very low, like 5 or 10. # Requirements - If you don't know the subject at all, return an empty list. - If the subject is not a named entity, return an empty list. - Include at least one triple where predicate is "instanceOf". - Do not get too wordy. - Separate several objects into multiple triples with one object.
Input
Subject: United States v. Munoz-Flores Description of subject: United States v. Munoz-Flores is a 1990 U.S. Supreme Court case that addressed whether a federal statute imposing monetary assessments on convicted offenders violated the Constitution’s Origination Clause.
Referenced by (2)
Full triples — surface form annotated when it differs from this entity's canonical label.
United States v. Munoz-Flores
→
fullCaseName
→
United States v. Munoz-Flores
self-linksurface differs
ⓘ
this entity surface form:
United States v. Humberto Munoz-Flores