Skip to content
Back to judgment

Citation network

Powell Vs. Texas

Cites for this judgment

  • US Supreme Court
  • Jun 17, 1968

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

49 entries 3 linked 46 unlinked
Show
  1. Louisiana Ex Rel. Francis Vs. Resweber US Supreme Court · Jan 13, 1947
  2. Trop Vs. Dulles US Supreme Court · Mar 31, 1958
  3. Leland Vs. Oregon US Supreme Court · Jun 09, 1952
  4. U.S. 514 (1968) U.S. Supreme Court Powell v. Texas
    Search
  5. U.S. 514 (1968) Powell v. Texas
    Search
  6. traditional sense, but were merely premises of a syllogism designed to bring this case within the scope of Robinson v. California
    Search
  7. alcoholic, but for being in public while drunk on a particular occasion, and thus, as distinguished from Robinson v. California
    Search
  8. the State to prove that the defendant actually committed some proscribed act do not come within the scope of Robinson v. California
    Search
  9. While Robinson v. California
    Search
  10. premises of a syllogism transparently designed to bring this case within the scope of this Court's opinion in Robinson v. California
    Search
  11. of the conduct made criminal is ordinarily relevant only to the fitness of the punishment imposed. See, e.g., Trop v. Dulles
    Search
  12. Weems v. United
    Search
  13. however, seeks to come within the application of the Cruel and Unusual Punishment Clause announced in Robinson v. California
    Search
  14. Durham v. United
    Search
  15. The experimentation of one jurisdiction in that field alone indicates the magnitude of the problem. See, e.g., Carter v. United
    Search
  16. Blocker v. United
    Search
  17. McDonald v. United
    Search
  18. Washington v. United
    Search
  19. See Washington v. United
    Search
  20. For the inadequate response in the District of Columbia following Easter v. District
    Search
  21. Cf. Commonwealth v. Phelan
    Search
  22. The Court did hold in Lambert v. California
    Search
  23. sanctions should in many situations be applied only to those whose conduct is morally blameworthy, see Morissette v. United
    Search
  24. III The rule of constitutional law urged by appellant is not required by Robinson v. California
    Search
  25. said for avoiding the use of criminal sanctions in many Page 392 U. S. 545 such situations. See Morissette v. United
    Search
  26. determine the extent to which moral culpability should be a prerequisite to conviction of a crime. E.g., United States v. Dotterweich
    Search
  27. his disease and occasioned by a compulsion symptomatic of the disease. Such a holding would appear to overrule Leland v. Oregon
    Search
  28. doctrinal rigidity, seems absurd in an area where our understanding is even today so incomplete. Page 392 U. S. 547 V Perceptive
    Search
  29. age-old questions of the criminal law's ethical foundations and practical effectiveness. I would hold that Robinson v. California
    Search
  30. does not do the act at all, and, of course, he is entitled to acquittal. E.g., Martin v. State
    Search
  31. the District of Columbia Circuit itself, and, in particular, by the author of the Durham opinion. See Washington v. United
    Search
  32. concurring in the result. If it cannot be a crime to have an irresistible compulsion to use narcotics, Robinson v. California
    Search
  33. upon the power of state legislatures to define crimes for which the imposition of punishment is ordered. In Robinson v. California
    Search
  34. Trop v. Dulles
    Search
  35. of public intoxication statutes have been invalidated on Eighth Amendment grounds in two circuits. See Easter v. District
    Search
  36. Driver v. Hinnant
    Search
  37. U.S. Supreme Court Powell v. Texas
    Search
  38. of Robinson v. California
    Search
  39. Robinson v. California
    Search
  40. Francis v. Resweber
    Search
  41. Carter v. United
    Search
  42. Easter v. District
    Search
  43. Lambert v. California
    Search
  44. Morissette v. United
    Search
  45. See Morissette v. United
    Search
  46. E.g., United States v. Dotterweich
    Search
  47. E.g., Martin v. State
    Search
  48. In Robinson v. California
    Search
  49. See Easter v. District
    Search

AI Briefs · Semantic Search · Save & annotate judgments

Start your 7-day free trial