Skip to content
Back to judgment

Citation network

Downum Vs. United States

Cites for this judgment

  • US Supreme Court
  • Apr 22, 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

43 entries 6 linked 37 unlinked
Show
  1. Dreyer Vs. Illinois US Supreme Court · Jan 01, 1902
  2. Keerl Vs. Montana US Supreme Court · Apr 05, 1909
  3. United States Vs. Ball US Supreme Court · May 25, 1896
  4. United States Vs. Perez US Supreme Court · Jan 01, 1824
  5. Wade Vs. Hunter US Supreme Court · Apr 25, 1949
  6. United States Vs. Shoemaker US Supreme Court · Jan 01, 1868
  7. Downum v. United
    Search
  8. States - 372 U.S. 734 (1963) U.S. Supreme Court Downum v. United
    Search
  9. States, 372 U.S. 734 (1963) Downum v. United
    Search
  10. F.2d 137, and we granted the petition for certiorari because of the seeming conflict between this decision and Cornero v. United
    Search
  11. be selected and sworn even though one of its key witnesses was absent and had not been found. From United States v. Perez
    Search
  12. Wheat. 579, decided in 1824, to Gori v. United
    Search
  13. without the defendant's consent. The classic example is a mistrial because the jury is unable to agree. United States v. Perez
    Search
  14. Logan v. United
    Search
  15. U. S. 135 . In Wade v. Hunter
    Search
  16. jury were biased pro or con one side has been held to warrant discharge of the jury and direction of a new trial. Wade v. Hunter
    Search
  17. Simmons v. United
    Search
  18. Thompson v. United
    Search
  19. in judgment on him may be subordinated to the public interest -- when there is an imperious necessity to do so. Wade v. Hunter
    Search
  20. supra, 336 U. S. 690 . Differences have arisen as to the application of the principle. See Brock v. North
    Search
  21. Green v. United
    Search
  22. so as to afford the prosecution a more favorable opportunity to convict are examples when jeopardy attaches. Gori v. United
    Search
  23. to use the words of Mr. Justice Story in United States v. Coolidge
    Search
  24. those two counts and to proceed with a trial on the other four counts -- a motion the court denied. Here, as in Wade v. Hunter
    Search
  25. Each case must turn on its facts. On this record, however, we think what was said in Cornero v. United
    Search
  26. In United States v. Watson
    Search
  27. United States v. Shoemaker
    Search
  28. HARLAN, MR. JUSTICE STEWART and MR. JUSTICE WHITE join, dissenting. The Court, in applying the rule of Cornero v. United
    Search
  29. Page 372 U. S. 740 In Wade v. Hunter
    Search
  30. Ibid. I adhere to Wade v. Hunter
    Search
  31. Id. at 336 U. S. 690 . In order to apply the principles of Wade v. Hunter
    Search
  32. Both Cornero and United States v. Watson
    Search
  33. U.S. Supreme Court Downum v. United
    Search
  34. and Cornero v. United
    Search
  35. From United States v. Perez
    Search
  36. Gori v. United
    Search
  37. In Wade v. Hunter
    Search
  38. See Brock v. North
    Search
  39. United States v. Coolidge
    Search
  40. Cornero v. United
    Search
  41. of Cornero v. United
    Search
  42. of Wade v. Hunter
    Search
  43. United States v. Watson
    Search

AI Briefs · Semantic Search · Save & annotate judgments

Start your 7-day free trial