Skip to content
How to use Judgment tools
  1. Click Tools to open PDF, Print, Tag, Note, Favourite, and CiteSignal.
  2. Use Brief & Ask in the toolbar for the AI Brief and case chat.
  3. Jump to sections with the pills below the help bar.

Rosenberg Vs. Denno

Rosenberg vs Denno

Type Court Judgment Court US Supreme Court Decided Jun-15-1953
~2 min read
https://sooperkanoon.com/case/98784

For advocates & juniors · 7-day free trial

Brief this judgment before chambers

Stop skimming 50 pages - get an 18-section AI Brief on this case, ask scoped follow-ups, and find related precedents with Semantic Search. Full trial, no card required.

  • 18-section brief - facts, issues, ratio, relief
  • Ask this case - answers cite the judgment
  • Semantic search - find precedents by meaning
  • Research drawer - sections, cites, related cases

No card required · credentials emailed · Log in if you already have an account

Citation
Court
US Supreme Court
Decided On
Case Number
346 U.S. 271
Subject
Education

Case Summary

AI-generated summary - not the official court judgment text.

Education

Key legal issue
Education

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

Rosenberg

Respondent

Denno

Excerpt

rosenberg v. denno - 346 u.s. 271 (1953) u.s. supreme court rosenberg v. denno, 346 u.s. 271 (1953) rosenberg v. denno no. 1, misc. june 15 special term, 1953 decided june 15, 1953 346 u.s. 271 on motion for leave to file petition for original writ of habeas corpus and stay of execution syllabus the rosenbergs had been sentenced to death for conspiracy to violate the espionage act of 1917, and the time of execution had been fixed for the week of june 15, 1953. as the court was about to adjourn the october term, 1952, on june 15, 1953, their counsel submitted a motion for leave to file a petition for an original writ of habeas corpus and stay of execution. later that afternoon, the court met in special term pursuant to a call by the chief justice having the approval of all the associate justices. all members of the court were present. held: leave to file petition for an original writ of habeas corpus denied. per curiam. the motion for leave to file petition for an original writ of habeas corpus is denied. mr. justice black dissents. mr. justice frankfurter: the disposition of an application to this court for habeas corpus is so rarely to be made by this court page 346 u. s. 272 directly that congress has given the court authority to transfer such an application to an appropriate district court. 28 u.s.c., § 2241. i do not favor such a disposition of this application, because the substance of the allegations now made has already been considered by the district court for the southern district of new york, and, on review, by the court of appeals for the second circuit. neither can i join the court in denying the application without more. i would set the application down for hearing before the full court tomorrow forenoon. oral argument frequently has a force beyond what the written word conveys.

Full Judgment

Rosenberg v. Denno - 346 U.S. 271 (1953)
U.S. Supreme Court Rosenberg v. Denno, 346 U.S. 271 (1953)

Rosenberg v. Denno

No. 1, Misc.

June 15 Special Term, 1953

Decided June 15, 1953

346 U.S. 271

ON MOTION FOR LEAVE TO FILE PETITION FOR ORIGINAL WRIT OF HABEAS CORPUS AND STAY OF EXECUTION

SYLLABUS

The Rosenbergs had been sentenced to death for conspiracy to violate the Espionage Act of 1917, and the time of execution had been fixed for the week of June 15, 1953. As the Court was about to adjourn the October Term, 1952, on June 15, 1953, their counsel submitted a motion for leave to file a petition for an original writ of habeas corpus and stay of execution. Later that afternoon, the Court met in Special Term pursuant to a call by THE CHIEF JUSTICE having the approval of all the Associate Justices. All Members of the Court were present.

Held: leave to file petition for an original writ of habeas corpus denied.

PER CURIAM.

The motion for leave to file petition for an original writ of habeas corpus is denied.

MR. JUSTICE BLACK dissents.

MR. JUSTICE FRANKFURTER:

The disposition of an application to this Court for habeas corpus is so rarely to be made by this Court

Page 346 U. S. 272

directly that Congress has given the Court authority to transfer such an application to an appropriate district court. 28 U.S.C., § 2241. I do not favor such a disposition of this application, because the substance of the allegations now made has already been considered by the District Court for the Southern District of New York, and, on review, by the Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit. Neither can I join the Court in denying the application without more. I would set the application down for hearing before the full Court tomorrow forenoon. Oral argument frequently has a force beyond what the written word conveys.

Continue Your Research


AI Briefs · Semantic Search · Save & annotate judgments

Start your 7-day free trial