Citation network
Carafas Vs. Lavallee
Cites for this judgment
- US Supreme Court
- May 20, 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
-
U.S. 234 (1968) U.S. Supreme Court Carafas v. LaValleeSearch
-
U.S. 234 (1968) Carafas v. LaValleeSearch
-
Fiswick v. UnitedSearch
-
merits, and must include in its order enough to demonstrate the basis for its action, as this Court held in Nowakowski v. MaroneySearch
-
state court proceedings and was sentenced to concurrent terms of three to five years. On direct appeal (following Mapp v. OhioSearch
-
had been introduced against him at trial. The Appellate Division affirmed the conviction without opinion, People v. CarafasSearch
-
because of facts to which we later refer, the Court of Appeals' dismissal conformed to our holding in Nowakowski v. MaroneySearch
-
appellate review, terminates federal jurisdiction with respect to the application. Respondent relies upon Parker v. EllisSearch
-
consideration of petitioner's cause or to the grant of relief upon his petition for a writ of habeas corpus. Parker v. EllisSearch
-
the case is Page 391 U. S. 238 not moot. Ginsberg v. NewSearch
-
United States v. MorganSearch
-
U. S. 502 , 346 U. S. 512 -513 (1954). The substantial issue, however, which is posed by Parker v. EllisSearch
-
Brief any citation in this list with AI Studio
-
corpus jurisdiction of the federal judiciary in respect of persons in state custody is available here. In Parker v. EllisSearch
-
Court. For the reasons which we here summarize and which are stated at length in the dissenting opinions in Parker v. EllisSearch
-
and speedy instrument by which judicial inquiry may be had into the legality of the detention of a person. See Peyton v. RoweSearch
-
See Peyton v. RoweSearch
-
Walker v. WainwrightSearch
-
The federal habeas corpus statute does not require this result, and Parker v. EllisSearch
-
was thereafter denied. It is this action of the Court of Appeals that brings into issue our decision in Nowakowski v. MaroneySearch
-
corpus proceeding which, like this one, was not concluded at the time Nowakowski was decided. Cf. Eskridge v. WashingtonSearch
-
Linkletter v. WalkerSearch
-
can be made into the legality of detention, it has been held that there is no habeas corpus jurisdiction. See Parker v. EllisSearch
-
Rivera v. ReevesSearch
-
Burnett v. GladdenSearch
-
See Thomas v. CunninghamSearch
-
MR. JUSTICE HARLAN and MR. JUSTICE STEWART, concurring. Although we joined the per curiam decision in Parker v. EllisSearch
-
U.S. Supreme Court Carafas v. LaValleeSearch
-
Mapp v. OhioSearch
-
People v. CarafasSearch
-
Ginsberg v. NewSearch
-
In Parker v. EllisSearch
-
and Parker v. EllisSearch
-
Cf. Eskridge v. WashingtonSearch
-
Linkletter v. WalkerSearch
-
See Parker v. EllisSearch
-
Rivera v. ReevesSearch
AI Brief on cited cases - 7-day free trial