Citation network
Callanan Vs. United States
Cites for this judgment
- US Supreme Court
- Jan 09, 1961
Citation network · 7-day free trial
Brief every cited case in minutes
Open an 18-section AI Brief on any citation below, 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
-
Callanan v. UnitedSearch
-
States - 364 U.S. 587 (1961) U.S. Supreme Court Callanan v. UnitedSearch
-
States, 364 U.S. 587 (1961) Callanan v. UnitedSearch
-
which constituted a misdemeanor -- was said to merge with the completed felony which was its object. See Commonwealth v. KingsburySearch
-
these advantages were unavailable on trial for a felony. King v. WestbeerSearch
-
a constituent misdemeanor upon an indictment for the felony. When the substantive crime was also a misdemeanor, People v. MatherSearch
-
Wend., N.Y., 229, 265, or when the conspiracy was defined by statute as a felony, State v. MayberrySearch
-
disappeared, the Page 364 U. S. 590 merger concept lost significance, and today it has been abandoned. Queen v. ButtonSearch
-
Pinkerton v. UnitedSearch
-
In view of this Court's restrictive Page 364 U. S. 591 decision in United States v. LocalSearch
-
States, 328 U. S. 640 , 328 U. S. 643 . See also Pereira v. UnitedSearch
-
U. S. 11 . Over the years, this distinction has been applied in various situations. For example, in Clune v. UnitedSearch
-
same result was reached when, as in the present case, both offenses were described within the same statute. In Carter v. McClaughrySearch
-
In American Tobacco Co. v. UnitedSearch
-
Brief any citation in this list with AI Studio
-
we pronounced in American Tobacco would require specific language to the contrary. See also Albrecht v. UnitedSearch
-
Burton v. UnitedSearch
-
overriding consideration of being lenient to wrongdoers. That is not the function of the judiciary. In United States v. UniversalSearch
-
Bell v. UnitedSearch
-
States, 349 U. S. 81 , and Ladner v. UnitedSearch
-
accordingly, the rule of lenity was utilized, in favorem libertatis, to resolve the ambiguity. In Price v. UnitedSearch
-
States, 352 U. S. 322 , and Heflin v. UnitedSearch
-
when the claim is based on the face of the indictment even if such claim had not been raised on direct appeal, Heflin v. UnitedSearch
-
and a conspiracy to commit it may be treated by Congress as separate offenses, cumulatively punishable. Pinkerton v. UnitedSearch
-
the House bill without debate. 78 Cong.Rec. 11482. In 1942, this Court considered the 1934 Act in United States v. LocalSearch
-
me wholly at odds with principles firmly established by our previous decisions. Page 364 U. S. 602 In Bell v. UnitedSearch
-
U.S. at 349 U. S. 83 . In Ladner v. UnitedSearch
-
U.S. at 358 U. S. 178 . In Prince v. UnitedSearch
-
The Court's reliance upon American Tobacco Co. v. UnitedSearch
-
of what Congress may have provided in another statute would seem to me a dubious way to resolve the issue. Cf. Bell v. UnitedSearch
-
U.S. Supreme Court Callanan v. UnitedSearch
-
See Commonwealth v. KingsburySearch
-
King v. WestbeerSearch
-
People v. MatherSearch
-
State v. MayberrySearch
-
Queen v. ButtonSearch
-
United States v. LocalSearch
-
Pereira v. UnitedSearch
-
Clune v. UnitedSearch
-
In Carter v. McClaughrySearch
-
Albrecht v. UnitedSearch
-
In United States v. UniversalSearch
-
and Ladner v. UnitedSearch
-
In Price v. UnitedSearch
-
and Heflin v. UnitedSearch
-
Heflin v. UnitedSearch
-
In Bell v. UnitedSearch
-
In Ladner v. UnitedSearch
-
In Prince v. UnitedSearch
-
American Tobacco Co. v. UnitedSearch
AI Brief on cited cases - 7-day free trial