Citation network
Haynes Vs. Washington
Cites for this judgment
- US Supreme Court
- May 27, 1963
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
-
U.S. 503 (1963) U.S. Supreme Court Haynes v. WashingtonSearch
-
U.S. 503 (1963) Haynes v. WashingtonSearch
-
recitations Page 373 U. S. 513 in the challenged confession that it was not involuntarily induced. Cf. Haley v. OhioSearch
-
Wilson v. UnitedSearch
-
States, 162 U. S. 613 , 162 U. S. 623 . See also Bram v. UnitedSearch
-
into evidence of a coerced confession be the subject of an independent determination here, see, e.g., Ashcraft v. TennesseeSearch
-
Spano v. NewSearch
-
Brief any citation in this list with AI Studio
-
Stein v. NewSearch
-
the trial scene, and thus afforded the best opportunity to evaluate contradictory testimony. But, as declared in Ward v. TexasSearch
-
To the same effect, see, e.g., Spano v. NewSearch
-
Thomas v. ArizonaSearch
-
of substantial independent evidence tending to demonstrate the guilt of the petitioner. As was said in Rogers v. RichmondSearch
-
disregard by police of state law, see note 7 supra, and of the basic rights of the defendant. See Haley v. OhioSearch
-
Fikes v. AlabamaSearch
-
Gallagos v. NebraskaSearch
-
people with whom the Court's cases in this area have ordinarily dealt, such as the mentally subnormal accused, Fikes v. AlabamaSearch
-
U. S. 560 (1958), and Reck v. PateSearch
-
the youthful offender, such as Haley v. OhioSearch
-
U. S. 596 (1948), and Gallegos v. ColoradoSearch
-
or the naive and impressionable defendant, such as Lynumn v. IllinoisSearch
-
to police techniques and custodial procedures nor unaware of his rights on arrest. Thus the Court's reliance on Lynumn v. IllinoisSearch
-
occurred. We have long recognized that coercion need not be based upon the physical torture involved in Brown v. MississippiSearch
-
Malinski v. NewSearch
-
York, 324 U. S. 401 , 324 U. S. 404 (1945), citing Lisenba v. CaliforniaSearch
-
U. S. 219 (1941), and Ashcraft v. TennesseeSearch
-
U. S. 143 (1944). We have held that the fact that one has been denied consultation with an attorney, Cicenia v. LagaySearch
-
U. S. 504 (1958), Crooker v. CaliforniaSearch
-
that the confession was not his own, requires a reversal under the Fourteenth Amendment. Lisenba v. CaliforniaSearch
-
Gallegos v. NebraskaSearch
-
him a confession he would not otherwise have made, a confession which was not the product of a free will. In Crooker v. CaliforniaSearch
-
In Lynumn v. IllinoisSearch
-
See Spano v. NewSearch
-
See Reck v. PateSearch
-
See Leyra v. DennoSearch
-
Malinski v. NewSearch
-
See Payne v. ArkansasSearch
-
U.S. Supreme Court Haynes v. WashingtonSearch
-
Cf. Haley v. OhioSearch
-
Bram v. UnitedSearch
-
See Haley v. OhioSearch
-
Fikes v. AlabamaSearch
-
and Reck v. PateSearch
AI Brief on cited cases - 7-day free trial