Citation network
Dutton Vs. Evans
Cites for this judgment
- US Supreme Court
- Dec 15, 1970
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. 74 (1970) U.S. Supreme Court Dutton v. EvansSearch
-
U.S. 74 (1970) Dutton v. EvansSearch
-
holding was in accord with a consistent line of Georgia decisions construing the state statute. See, e.g., Chatterton v. StateSearch
-
Burns v. StateSearch
-
U. S. 400 , 380 U. S. 403 . See also Douglas v. AlabamaSearch
-
Illinois v. AllenSearch
-
California v. GreenSearch
-
This Court has recognized the admissibility against an accused of dying declarations, Mattox v. UnitedSearch
-
U. S. 151 , and of testimony of a deceased witness who has testified at a former trial, Mattox v. UnitedSearch
-
States, 156 U. S. 237 , 156 U. S. 240 -244. See also Dowdell v. UnitedSearch
-
Brief any citation in this list with AI Studio
-
Kirby v. UnitedSearch
-
period when the conspirators were engaged in nothing more than concealment of the criminal enterprise. Lutwak v. UnitedSearch
-
Krulewitch v. UnitedSearch
-
phase of a conspiracy, such an extension automatically violates the Confrontation Clause. Last Term, in California v. GreenSearch
-
Grunewald v. UnitedSearch
-
of the constitutional right of confrontation. The cases upon which the appellee Evans primarily relies are Pointer v. TexasSearch
-
Douglas Page 400 U. S. 84 v. AlabamaSearch
-
and Roberts v. RussellSearch
-
Ibid. Brookhart v. JanisSearch
-
and Barber v. PageSearch
-
to obtain the witness' presence at the trial. Id. at 390 U. S. 725 . In Roberts v. RussellSearch
-
we held that the doctrine of Bruton v. UnitedSearch
-
jury that the statement, though made, might have been unreliable was wholly unreal. Almost 40 years ago, in Snyder v. MassachusettsSearch
-
Evans v. StateSearch
-
Evans v. DuttonSearch
-
U.S. at 380 U. S. 407 . See also Salinger v. UnitedSearch
-
See Hawkins v. UnitedSearch
-
The Georgia rule is hardly unique. See, e.g., Reed v. PeopleSearch
-
Dailey v. StateSearch
-
State v. RobertsSearch
-
imposed in this case cannot be carried out, because the jury was qualified under standards violative of Witherspoon v. IllinoisSearch
-
under Witherspoon, the death sentence imposed upon Venson Williams, Evans' alleged accomplice. See Williams v. DuttonSearch
-
practical and legal insignificance. The error here, if one exists, is harmless beyond a reasonable doubt. Chapman v. CaliforniaSearch
-
I believe this assumption to be wrong. Contrary to things as they appeared to me last Term when I wrote in California v. GreenSearch
-
he does not quite yet embrace it. Nor am I now content with the position I took in concurrence in California v. GreenSearch
-
Gilstrap v. UnitedSearch
-
Kay v. UnitedSearch
-
guarantees federal defendants the right of compulsory process to obtain the presence of witnesses, and, in Washington v. TexasSearch
-
is consistent with the view of the clause I have taken. Passing on to the other principal cases, Dowdell v. UnitedSearch
-
to the clause, rather than a problem to which the clause did not speak, the result would seem correct. Brookhart v. JanisSearch
-
U.S. Supreme Court Dutton v. EvansSearch
-
Chatterton v. StateSearch
-
Douglas v. AlabamaSearch
-
Mattox v. UnitedSearch
-
Dowdell v. UnitedSearch
AI Brief on cited cases - 7-day free trial