Skip to content
Back to judgment

Citation network

Douglas Vs. Alabama

Cites for this judgment

  • US Supreme Court
  • Apr 05, 1965

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

29 entries 1 linked 28 unlinked
Show
  1. Love Vs. Griffith US Supreme Court · Oct 20, 1924
  2. U.S. 415 (1965) U.S. Supreme Court Douglas v. Alabama
    Search
  3. U.S. 415 (1965) Douglas v. Alabama
    Search
  4. by the Confrontation Clause of the Sixth Amendment, which is made applicable to the States by the Fourteenth. Pointer v. Texas
    Search
  5. I We decide today that the Confrontation Clause of the Sixth Amendment is applicable to the States. Pointer v. Texas
    Search
  6. cross-examination may satisfy the clause even in the absence of physical confrontation. As the Court said in Mattox v. United
    Search
  7. State v. Hester
    Search
  8. in which the jury might improperly infer both that the statement had been made and that it was true. Slochower v. Board
    Search
  9. United States v. Maloney
    Search
  10. to its genuineness could not substitute for cross-examination of Loyd to test the truth of the statement itself. Motes v. United
    Search
  11. Kirby v. United
    Search
  12. Clause that no suggestion is made that Loyd's refusal to answer was procured by the petitioner, see Motes v. United
    Search
  13. Namet v. United
    Search
  14. States, 373 U. S. 179 , 373 U. S. 187 . See also Fletcher v. United
    Search
  15. the adequacy of state procedural bars to the assertion of federal questions is, itself, a federal question. See Wright v. Georgia
    Search
  16. sufficient to serve legitimate state interests, and therefore sufficient to preserve the claim for review here. Davis v. Wechsler
    Search
  17. liberty. I concur in the judgment of reversal on the premises stated in my opinion concurring in the result in Pointer v. Texas
    Search
  18. view is, of course, far more than a matter of mere semantics. See my opinion concurring in the result in Pointer v. Texas
    Search
  19. U.S. Supreme Court Douglas v. Alabama
    Search
  20. the Fourteenth. Pointer v. Texas
    Search
  21. the States. Pointer v. Texas
    Search
  22. Mattox v. United
    Search
  23. Slochower v. Board
    Search
  24. Motes v. United
    Search
  25. Kirby v. United
    Search
  26. Fletcher v. United
    Search
  27. See Wright v. Georgia
    Search
  28. Davis v. Wechsler
    Search
  29. Pointer v. Texas
    Search

AI Briefs · Semantic Search · Save & annotate judgments

Start your 7-day free trial