Skip to content
Back to judgment

Citation network

United States Vs. Sisson

Cites for this judgment

  • US Supreme Court
  • Jun 29, 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

72 entries 12 linked 60 unlinked
Show
  1. United States Vs. Ball US Supreme Court · May 25, 1896
    Distinguished
  2. United States Vs. Waters US Supreme Court · Jan 01, 1890
  3. United States Vs. Blue US Supreme Court · May 23, 1966
  4. Bond Vs. Dustin US Supreme Court · Dec 22, 1884
  5. United States Vs. Halseth US Supreme Court · Jan 07, 1952
    Relied / Followed
  6. United States Vs. Fruehauf US Supreme Court · Feb 20, 1961
    Relied / Followed
  7. United States Vs. Keitel US Supreme Court · Dec 14, 1908
  8. United States Vs. Hark US Supreme Court · Jan 03, 1944
  9. United States Vs. Mersky US Supreme Court · Feb 23, 1960
  10. United States Vs. Cantril US Supreme Court · Jan 01, 1807
  11. United States Vs. Covington US Supreme Court · May 19, 1969
  12. United States Vs. Rabinowich US Supreme Court · Jun 01, 1915
  13. U.S. 267 (1970) U.S. Supreme Court United States v. Sisson
    Search
  14. U.S. 267 (1970) United States v. Sisson
    Search
  15. This requirement can be found in early English common law cases. In Sutton v. Bishop
    Search
  16. this essential limitation of arrests of judgment was explicitly acknowledged by this Court. In United States v. Klintock
    Search
  17. And later, in Bond v. Dustin
    Search
  18. id. at 112 U. S. 608 . See Carter v. Bennett
    Search
  19. a district court must not look beyond the face of the record. E.g., United States v. Zisblatt
    Search
  20. United States v. Lias
    Search
  21. United States v. Bradford
    Search
  22. can be relied on by the District Court without affecting the jurisdiction for an appeal, citing United States v. Halseth
    Search
  23. U. S. 277 (1952), and United States v. Fruehauf
    Search
  24. and it did not discuss -- whether reliance on a stipulation would make any difference. Insofar as United States v. Fruehauf
    Search
  25. fail to establish its contention, but other authority points strongly in the opposite direction. In United States v. Norris
    Search
  26. Criminal Appeals Act should be strictly construed against the Government's right to appeal, see, e.g., United States v. Borden
    Search
  27. never been thought that an indictment, in order to be sufficient, need anticipate affirmative defenses, United States v. Fargas
    Search
  28. United States v. Borden
    Search
  29. Carroll v. United
    Search
  30. United States v. Keitel
    Search
  31. Will v. United
    Search
  32. Will v. United
    Search
  33. determinations is so intertwined with the general issue that it must be tried with the general issue, United States v. Fargas
    Search
  34. United States v. Ramos
    Search
  35. We have today granted certiorari in Gillette v. United
    Search
  36. States (No. 1170), and Negre v. Larsen
    Search
  37. United States v. Zisblatt
    Search
  38. United States v. Hark
    Search
  39. should be read to include the entire statute, and not simply the penalty provisions. See United States v. Socony
    Search
  40. United States v. Mersky
    Search
  41. See United States v. Zisblatt
    Search
  42. This Court first recognized the existence of motions in arrest of judgment in United States v. Cantril
    Search
  43. even hints that evidence presented at the trial can be the basis for a motion in arrest of judgment. In United States v. Green
    Search
  44. U. S. 418 and 350 U. S. 421 , with the dissent, 350 U.S. at 350 U. S. 421 . In United States v. Bramblett
    Search
  45. Finally, the Government refers to United States v. Waters
    Search
  46. Court should not have had jurisdiction in United States v. Covington
    Search
  47. United States v. Apex
    Search
  48. United States v. Armour
    Search
  49. United States v. Kissel
    Search
  50. in bar based on a statute of limitations defense, with no explanation of the apparent inconsistency. See United States v. Goldman
    Search

AI Briefs · Semantic Search · Save & annotate judgments

Start your 7-day free trial