Citation network
Stone Vs. Powell
Cites for this judgment
- US Supreme Court
- Jul 06, 1976
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
-
Brief any citation in this list with AI Studio
-
U.S. 465 (1976) U.S. Supreme Court Stone v. PowellSearch
-
U.S. 465 (1976) Stone v. PowellSearch
-
a) Until these cases, this Court has had no occasion fully to examine the validity of the assumption made in Kaufman v. UnitedSearch
-
state court on the basis of evidence obtained in an illegal search or seizure since those Amendments were held in Mapp v. OhioSearch
-
if any, in admitting the testimony of the Henderson officer was harmless beyond a reasonable doubt under Chapman v. CaliforniaSearch
-
affirmed the conviction, holding that the search of Rice's home had been pursuant to a valid search warrant. State v. RiceSearch
-
District Court concluded that the search warrant was invalid, as the supporting affidavit was defective under Spinelli v. UnitedSearch
-
States, 393 U. S. 410 (1969), and Aguilar v. TexasSearch
-
until Frank v. MangumSearch
-
whether a detention was lawful. Id. at 237 U. S. 333 -336. In the landmark decision in Brown v. AllenSearch
-
In that case and its companion case, Daniels v. AllenSearch
-
admissible. In Brown, the highest court of the State had rejected these claims on direct appeal, State v. BrownSearch
-
broad collateral reexamination of state criminal convictions in federal habeas corpus proceedings was removed in Fay v. NoiaSearch
-
Court followed Daniels in holding that Noia's failure to appeal barred habeas corpus review. See United States v. FaySearch
-
Page 428 U. S. 479 to particular categories of constitutional claims. Prior to the Court's decision in Kaufman v. UnitedSearch
-
U.S. at 394 U. S. 224 . See Thornton v. UnitedSearch
-
or consideration of the issue, has continued to accept jurisdiction in cases raising such claims. See Lefkowitz v. NewsomeSearch
-
court on the basis of evidence obtained in an illegal search or seizure, since those Amendments were held in Mapp v. OhioSearch
-
Until these cases, we have not had occasion fully to consider the validity of this view. See, e.g., Schneckloth v. BustamonteSearch
-
evils associated with the use of the general warrant in England and the writs of assistance in the Colonies, Stanford v. TexasSearch
-
Boyd v. UnitedSearch
-
created means of effectuating the rights secured by the Fourth Amendment. Prior to the Court's decisions in Weeks v. UnitedSearch
-
States, 232 U. S. 383 (1914), and Gouled v. UnitedSearch
-
no barrier to the introduction in criminal trials of evidence obtained in violation of the Amendment. See Adams v. NewSearch
-
Gouled, the Court held broadly that such evidence could not be introduced in a federal prosecution. See Warden v. HaydenSearch
-
U. S. 294 , 387 U. S. 304 -305 (1967). See also Silverthorne Lumber Co. v. UnitedSearch
-
S. 385 (1920) (fruits of illegally seized evidence). Thirty-five years after Weeks, the Court held in Wolf v. ColoradoSearch
-
U.S. at 338 U. S. 29 . The full force of Wolf was eroded in subsequent decisions, see Elkins v. UnitedSearch
-
Rea v. UnitedSearch
-
and, a little more than a decade later, the exclusionary rule was held applicable to the States in Mapp v. OhioSearch
-
United States v. PeltierSearch
-
unconstitutionally seized evidence despite lack of objection by the defendant, or even over his assent. Cf. Henry v. MississippiSearch
-
of the standing limitations on who may object to the introduction of unconstitutionally seized evidence, Alderman v. UnitedSearch
AI Brief on cited cases - 7-day free trial