Citation network
Johnson Vs. Louisiana
Cites for this judgment
- US Supreme Court
- May 22, 1972
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
- Relied / Followed
- Distinguished
-
U.S. 356 (1972) U.S. Supreme Court Johnson v. LouisianaSearch
-
U.S. 356 (1972) Johnson v. LouisianaSearch
-
was a forbidden fruit of an invasion of appellant's Fourth Amendment rights. Appellant conceded that, under Duncan v. LouisianaSearch
-
and he appealed here. We noted probable jurisdiction. 400 U.S. 900 (1970). Conceding that, under Duncan v. LouisianaSearch
-
U. S. 145 (1968), the Sixth Amendment is not applicable to his case, see DeStefano v. WoodsSearch
-
Brief any citation in this list with AI Studio
-
U. S. 167 , 225 U. S. 176 (1912) (dictum). Accord, Maxwell v. DowSearch
-
Davis v. UnitedSearch
-
States, 160 U. S. 469 , 160 U. S. 488 (1895). See also Leland v. OregonSearch
-
Brinegar Page 406 U. S. 360 v. UnitedSearch
-
Coffin v. UnitedSearch
-
United States v. JohnsonSearch
-
F.2d 5, 6 n. 1 (CA2 1965). Accord, e.g., Bishop v. UnitedSearch
-
United States v. SchneidermanSearch
-
United States v. HauptSearch
-
Allen v. UnitedSearch
-
though the evidence was such that the jury would have been justified in having a reasonable doubt, see United States v. QuarlesSearch
-
Bell v. UnitedSearch
-
the trial judge might not have Page 406 U. S. 363 reached the same conclusion as the jury, see Takahashi v. UnitedSearch
-
are closely divided on the issue whether there was sufficient evidence to support a conviction. See United States v. JohnsonSearch
-
United States v. Manuel-BacaSearch
-
the unanimity rule and is instructed to acquit a defendant if it has a reasonable doubt about his guilt, see Holt v. UnitedSearch
-
Agnew v. UnitedSearch
-
cannot agree unanimously upon a verdict, the defendant is not acquitted, but is merely given a new trial. Downum v. UnitedSearch
-
State v. LewisSearch
-
that the States are free under the Federal Constitution to try defendants with juries of less than 12 men. Williams v. FloridaSearch
-
Wong Sun v. UnitedSearch
-
on the assumption that the standard was essential to a civilized system of criminal procedure. See generally Duncan v. LouisianaSearch
-
This opinion applies also to No . 65046, Apodaca et al. v. OregonSearch
-
in the plurality opinion of MR. JUSTICE WHITE, I will state my views separately. I 69-5035 Duncan v. LouisianaSearch
-
fundamental of our system of jurisprudence. With this principle of due process, I am in full accord. In DeStefano v. WoodsSearch
-
by the Due Process Clause contemplates a corollary requirement that its judgment be unanimous. Indeed, in Johnson v. LouisianaSearch
-
no reason to question the rationality of Louisiana's tri-level system. I therefore join the Court's opinion in Johnson v. LouisianaSearch
-
Page 406 U. S. 369 II 69-5046 In the Oregon case decided today, Apodaca v. OregonSearch
-
or incorporated into the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment. As Mr. Justice Fortas, concurring in Duncan v. LouisianaSearch
-
virtually without dissent, that unanimity is one of the indispensable features of federal jury trial. Andres v. UnitedSearch
-
Patton v. UnitedSearch
-
Hawaii Page 406 U. S. 370 v. MankichiSearch
-
that due process does not require that the States apply the federal jury trial right, with all its gloss. In Maxwell v. DowSearch
-
Again, in Jordan v. MassachusettsSearch
-
Williams v. FloridaSearch
AI Brief on cited cases - 7-day free trial