Citation network
Codispoti Vs. Pennsylvania
Cites for this judgment
- US Supreme Court
- Jun 26, 1974
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. 506 (1974) U.S. Supreme Court Codispoti v. PennsylvaniaSearch
-
U.S. 506 (1974) Codispoti v. PennsylvaniaSearch
-
Though a crime carrying more than a six-month sentence is a serious offense triable by jury, Frank v. UnitedSearch
-
Baldwin v. NewSearch
-
conviction he will face a substantial term of imprisonment regardless of the punishment actually imposed. See Taylor v. HayesSearch
-
I In Duncan v. LouisianaSearch
-
Brief any citation in this list with AI Studio
-
in state criminal trials the right to jury trial provided in the Sixth Amendment. In a companion case, Bloom v. IllinoisSearch
-
more than six months are serious crimes, and those carrying a sentence of six months or less are petty crimes. Frank v. UnitedSearch
-
face a substantial term of imprisonment upon conviction, regardless of the punishment actually imposed. See Taylor v. HayesSearch
-
whenever the punishment imposed for separate contemptuous acts during trial exceeds six months. Cf. United States v. SealeSearch
-
F.2d 345, 355 (CA7 1972). Bloom v. IllinoisSearch
-
Illinois v. AllenSearch
-
supra, at 397 U. S. 350 (BRENNAN, J., concurring). More recently, in Mayberry v. PennsylvaniaSearch
-
action to preserve order and no justification for dispensing with the ordinary rudiments of due process. Mayberry v. PennsylvaniaSearch
-
Yates v. UnitedSearch
-
convictions during trial that are unwarranted by the facts will not be invulnerable to appellate review. Cf. Sacher v. UnitedSearch
-
guilt on the contempt charges had already been conclusively adjudicated in this Court. Our decision in Mayberry v. PennsylvaniaSearch
-
to note that, although only three Members of the Court explicitly embraced the six-month demarcation point in Baldwin v. NewSearch
-
they were originally tried and convicted of contempt in 1966, two years before this Court's decisions in Duncan v. LouisianaSearch
-
U. S. 145 (1968), and Bloom v. IllinoisSearch
-
U. S. 194 (1968), which we held in DeStefano v. WoodsSearch
-
should receive only prospective application. His dissent finds further support for its conclusion in Jenkins v. DelawareSearch
-
U. S. 213 (1969), where the Court held that Miranda v. ArizonaSearch
-
failure to grant jury trial where trials began prior to May 20, 1968, the date of this Court's decisions in Duncan v. LouisianaSearch
-
and Bloom v. IllinoisSearch
-
if illegal, would preclude the use of perhaps critical evidence gathered in reliance on then-existing law. Jenkins v. DelawareSearch
-
dispute, we are duty-bound to make an independent examination of the evidence in the record. See, e.g., Edwards v. SouthSearch
-
Ante at 418 U. S. 515 -516, quoting Duncan v. LouisianaSearch
-
Ante at 418 U. S. 515 . But we rejected this very argument in Bloom v. IllinoisSearch
-
of the problem of courtroom disorder and its solution can be found than Mr. Justice Black's statement in Illinois v. AllenSearch
-
Blackmun, With Whom the Chief Justice, Mr. Justice Stewart, and Mr. Justice Rehnquist Join, Dissenting. in Bloom. V. IllinoisSearch
-
S. 523 the case from the contemned judge is fully served by assigning the case to a different judge. See Taylor v. HayesSearch
-
In Bloom v. IllinoisSearch
-
virtually out of whole cloth by this Court in Page 418 U. S. 524 the course of only 20-odd years. In Sacher v. UnitedSearch
-
is this Court's inveterate propensity to second-guess the trial judge. Page 418 U. S. 525 I In Taylor v. HayesSearch
-
in Rule 42(a) were subject to any constitutional infirmity. Yet, by the decision in Taylor Page 418 U. S. 527 v. HayesSearch
-
U. S. 277 (1889), quoting Ex parte Terry, 128 U. S. 289 , 128 U. S. 309 (1888). See Cooke v. UnitedSearch
-
subject to some qualification. In re Oliver, 333 U. S. 257 , 333 U. S. 274 -276 (1948). Groppi v. LeslieSearch
-
that would prevent the latter from maintaining the calm detachment necessary for fair adjudication, Mayberry v. PennsylvaniaSearch
-
U.S. Supreme Court Codispoti v. PennsylvaniaSearch
-
Frank v. UnitedSearch
AI Brief on cited cases - 7-day free trial