Citation network
Lynch Vs. Overholser
Cites for this judgment
- US Supreme Court
- May 21, 1962
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
- Relied / Followed
-
U.S. 705 (1962) U.S. Supreme Court Lynch v. OverholserSearch
-
U.S. 705 (1962) Lynch v. OverholserSearch
-
to statutory construction which confines itself to the bare words of a statute, e.g., Church of the Holy Trinity v. UnitedSearch
-
if fairly possible, in such a way as to free it from not insubstantial constitutional doubts. E.g., United States v. JinSearch
-
International Assn. of Machinists v. StreetSearch
-
At both of these hearings, representation by counsel or by a guardian ad litem is necessary. Dooling v. OverholserSearch
-
Davis v. UnitedSearch
-
States, 160 U. S. 469 , 160 U. S. 484 . See, e.g., Isaac v. UnitedSearch
-
States, 109 U.S.App.D.C. 34, 284 F.2d 168. Compare Leland v. OregonSearch
-
direct result of the change in the standard of criminal responsibility in the District of Columbia wrought by Durham v. UnitedSearch
-
g) as construed by the Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia in Overholser v. LeachSearch
-
Brief any citation in this list with AI Studio
-
Ragsdale v. OverholserSearch
-
District of Columbia v. TrembleySearch
-
United States v. TaylorSearch
-
United States v. KlomanSearch
-
United States v. StricklandSearch
-
considered in Greenwood v. UnitedSearch
-
which was created in part by the rule in Durham v. UnitedSearch
-
In protecting the public from the criminally incompetent, it could, with reason, act with less caution. See Overholser v. LeachSearch
-
U.S.App.D.C. 289, 291, 257 F.2d 667, 669, and Kenstrip v. CranorSearch
-
on insanity grounds in Massachusetts was remanded to the sheriff for continued custody as early as 1810, Commonwealth v. MeriamSearch
-
in 1835, United States v. LawrenceSearch
-
on the ground of insanity. That is, unlike defendants committed before or during the trial, see State ex rel. Smilack v. BushongSearch
-
that serves to explain and, in Congress' opinion, to justify different treatment for such individuals. Overholser v. LeachSearch
-
case, Congress wanted commitment if the judge found the accused insane or if the jury entertained a reasonable doubt. v. I agreeSearch
-
d) was the response of Congress to the decision in Durham v. UnitedSearch
-
of the Durham rule by other courts in jurisdictions where no mandatory commitment statute is available. Sauer v. UnitedSearch
-
United States v. SmithSearch
-
United States v. CurrensSearch
-
to the public. The policy of the law also includes assurance of rehabilitation for those so committed. Ragsdale v. OverholserSearch
-
law permitted an acquitted incompetent to be confined in the District of Columbia even before 1901. United States v. LawrenceSearch
-
by reason of insanity, and deprives them of the treatment afforded by a humanitarian public policy. See Ragsdale v. OverholserSearch
-
Quercia v. UnitedSearch
-
Glasser v. UnitedSearch
-
United States v. MarzanoSearch
-
that the trial judge is required to set aside jury findings of sanity where the record shows a reasonable doubt. Isaac v. UnitedSearch
-
unquestionably proper for the prosecutor to introduce testimony of insanity. His function, this Court said in Berger v. UnitedSearch
-
to borrow a phrase from Mr. Justice Cardozo in Moore Ice Cream Co. v. RoseSearch
-
necessity for further hospitalization. The Court has not hesitated to use a similar device in another area. Coppedge v. UnitedSearch
-
Apparently, in Tennessee, there is likewise no common law power to confine the acquitted insane. See Dove v. StateSearch
-
Bailey v. StateSearch
-
Hodison v. RogersSearch
-
State v. BurrisSearch
-
People v. DubianSearch
-
Peabody v. ChanlerSearch
-
State v. SaffronSearch
AI Brief on cited cases - 7-day free trial