Citation network
GersteIn Vs. Pugh
Cites for this judgment
- US Supreme Court
- Feb 18, 1975
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. 103 (1975) U.S. Supreme Court Gerstein v. PughSearch
-
U.S. 103 (1975) Gerstein v. PughSearch
-
State v. HernandezSearch
-
Di Bona v. StateSearch
-
held that the filing of an information foreclosed the suspect's right to a preliminary hearing. See Stat ex rel. Hardy v. BlountSearch
-
perhaps in exceptional circumstances, to test the probable cause for detention under an information. See Sullivan v. StateSearch
-
and arraignment, which the District Court found was often delayed a month or more after arrest. Pugh v. RainwaterSearch
-
Brief any citation in this list with AI Studio
-
afforded preliminary hearings to persons charged by information, the District Court granted the relief sought. Pugh v. RainwaterSearch
-
for arrest and detention have been derived from the Fourth Amendment and its common law antecedents. See Cupp v. MurphySearch
-
Page 420 U. S. 112 Beck v. OhioSearch
-
U. S. 89 , 379 U. S. 91 (1964). See also Henry v. UnitedSearch
-
Brinegar v. UnitedSearch
-
by a neutral and detached magistrate whenever possible. The classic statement of this principle appears in Johnson v. UnitedSearch
-
Terry v. OhioSearch
-
law enforcement. Thus, while the Court has expressed a preference for the use of arrest warrants when feasible, Beck v. OhioSearch
-
Wong Sun v. UnitedSearch
-
invalidated an arrest supported by probable cause solely because the officers failed to secure a warrant. See Ker v. CaliforniaSearch
-
Draper v. UnitedSearch
-
Trupiano v. UnitedSearch
-
result has historical support in the common law that has guided interpretation of the Fourth Amendment. See Carroll v. UnitedSearch
-
W. Hawkins, Pleas of the Crown 116-117 (4th ed. 1762). See also Kurtz v. MoffittSearch
-
seizure. See Draper v. UnitedSearch
-
Amendment. Indeed, we think the Court's previous decisions compel disapproval of the Florida procedure. In Albrecht v. UnitedSearch
-
More recently, in Coolidge v. NewSearch
-
role of a neutral and detached magistrate. We reaffirmed that principle in Shadwick Page 420 U. S. 118 v. CitySearch
-
of an arrest warrant must be determined by someone independent of police and prosecution. See also United States v. UnitedSearch
-
McNabb v. UnitedSearch
-
we adhere to the Court's prior holding that a judicial hearing is not prerequisite to prosecution by information. Beck v. WashingtonSearch
-
we retreat from the established rule that illegal arrest or detention does not void a subsequent conviction. Frisbie v. CollinsSearch
-
was detained pending trial without a determination of probable cause. 483 F.2d at 786-787. Compare Scarbrough v. DuttonSearch
-
F.2d 6 (CA5 1968), with Brown v. FauntleroySearch
-
U.S.App.D.C. 116, 442 F.2d 838 (1971), and Cooley v. StoneSearch
-
whether the evidence justifies going to trial under an information or presenting the case to a grand jury. See Coleman v. AlabamaSearch
-
on cross-examination. This kind of hearing also requires appointment of counsel for indigent defendants. Coleman v. AlabamaSearch
-
States, 338 U.S. at 338 U. S. 174 -175. Cf. McCray v. IllinoisSearch
-
procedures that would impair defense on the merits if the accused is required to proceed without counsel. Coleman v. AlabamaSearch
-
U. S. 218 , 388 U. S. 226 -227 (1967). In Coleman v. AlabamaSearch
-
Page 420 U. S. 124 see McNabb v. UnitedSearch
-
Florida law also denies preliminary hearings to persons confined under indictment, see Sangaree v. HamlinSearch
-
This statute may have been construed to make the hearing permissive, instead of mandatory. See Evans v. StateSearch
-
Fla.Op.Atty.Gen. 067-29 (1967). But cf. Karz v. OvertonSearch
-
ordered, the lawsuit did not come within the class of cases for which habeas corpus is the exclusive remedy. Preiser v. RodriguezSearch
AI Brief on cited cases - 7-day free trial