Skip to content
Back to judgment

Citation network

United States Vs. Gaddis

Cites for this judgment

  • US Supreme Court
  • Mar 03, 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

33 entries 2 linked 31 unlinked
Show
  1. United States Vs. Dion US Supreme Court · Jun 11, 1986
  2. United States Vs. Sharpe US Supreme Court · Mar 20, 1985
  3. U.S. 544 (1976) U.S. Supreme Court United States v. Gaddis
    Search
  4. U.S. 544 (1976) United States v. Gaddis
    Search
  5. sentenced on all counts. The Court of Appeals reversed, and ordered a new trial on the ground that, as held in Heflin v. United
    Search
  6. the accused of receiving and possessing the same money taken in the same bank robbery, and that, under Milanovich v. United
    Search
  7. Pp. 424 U. S. 548 -549. 3. The sentences under Counts 1 and 2 should also be vacated. Prince v. United
    Search
  8. eight counts of the indictment. Specifically, the appellate court held that this Court's decision in Heflin v. United
    Search
  9. and that, under this Court's decision in Milanovich v. United
    Search
  10. a) and (d), Prince v. United
    Search
  11. United States v. Sharpe
    Search
  12. United States v. Ploof
    Search
  13. United States v. Roach
    Search
  14. Phillips v. United
    Search
  15. United States v. Sellers
    Search
  16. United States v. Harris
    Search
  17. United States v. Abercrombie
    Search
  18. Ethridge v. United
    Search
  19. Keating v. United
    Search
  20. Glass v. United
    Search
  21. In light of Prince v. United
    Search
  22. with whom THE CHIEF JUSTICE joins, concurring. Because the Court deems this case distinguishable from Milanovich v. United
    Search
  23. when they should have considered and convicted on only one bears no relation to that presented in Stromberg v. California
    Search
  24. as the majority opinion requires, this problem will not arise. However, since this Court's decision in Milanovich v. United
    Search
  25. not to consider possession counts, if they convict of robbery. As this case and others attest, e.g., United States v. Sellers
    Search
  26. U.S. Supreme Court United States v. Gaddis
    Search
  27. Heflin v. United
    Search
  28. Milanovich v. United
    Search
  29. Prince v. United
    Search
  30. of Prince v. United
    Search
  31. Stromberg v. California
    Search
  32. United States v. Tyler
    Search
  33. United States v. Dixon
    Search

AI Briefs · Semantic Search · Save & annotate judgments

Start your 7-day free trial