Skip to content
Back to judgment

Citation network

Ralston Vs. Robinson

Cites for this judgment

  • US Supreme Court
  • Dec 02, 1981

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

63 entries 3 linked 60 unlinked
Show
  1. United States Vs. Benz US Supreme Court · Jan 05, 1931
  2. North Carolina Vs. Pearce US Supreme Court · Jun 23, 1969
  3. United States Vs. Mayer US Supreme Court · Nov 16, 1914
  4. U.S. 201 (1981) U.S. Supreme Court Ralston v. Robinson
    Search
  5. U.S. 201 (1981) Ralston v. Robinson
    Search
  6. from his YCA sentence and will begin his first adult sentence. Page 454 U. S. 206 II In Dorszynski v. United
    Search
  7. in judgment). We reiterated that trial courts retain significant control over sentencing options in Durst v. United
    Search
  8. See Brown v. Carlson
    Search
  9. FTC v. Fred
    Search
  10. Page 454 U. S. 218 v. The
    Search
  11. question presented. See 642 F.2d 1077 (1981). The United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit, Thompson v. Carlson
    Search
  12. warrants treating him immediately as an adult. The United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit, Outing v. Bell
    Search
  13. F.2d 1144 (1980), cert. denied sub nom. Outing v. Smith
    Search
  14. See n 4, supra. See, e.g., Watts v. Hadden
    Search
  15. Outing v. Bell
    Search
  16. F.2d 1144 (CA4 1980), cert. denied sub nom. Outing v. Smith
    Search
  17. Dancy v. Arnold
    Search
  18. Harvin v. United
    Search
  19. Brown v. Carlson
    Search
  20. Johnson v. Bell
    Search
  21. See Thompson v. Carlson
    Search
  22. court, after revoking probation, may impose any sentence that it might have imposed originally. See generally Durst v. United
    Search
  23. such a sentence is authorized by any statute and, if so, whether it violates the Equal Protection Clause. Cf. Carter v. United
    Search
  24. violates his term of probation has never been considered to raise a serious double jeopardy problem. See United States v. DiFrancesco
    Search
  25. Dorszynski v. United
    Search
  26. Carter v. United
    Search
  27. States, 113 U.S.App.D.C. 123, 125, 306 F.2d 283, 285 (1962) (quoting Cunningham v. United
    Search
  28. justifies YCA terms within the statutory adult maximum, but longer than an adult would generally receive. See Watts v. Hadden
    Search
  29. p. 641 (9th ed. 1889) (emphasis added) (quoted in United States v. Benz
    Search
  30. Whalen v. United
    Search
  31. Roberts v. United
    Search
  32. Ex parte Lange, 18 Wall. 163, 85 U. S. 168 . Although United States v. DiFrancesco
    Search
  33. U. S. 117 , purports to confine Ex parte Lange and United States v. Benz
    Search
  34. This case closely parallels Roberts v. United
    Search
  35. States, 113 U.S.App.D.C. 123, 125, 306 F.2d 283, 285 (1962). See United States v. McDonald
    Search
  36. Rogers v. United
    Search
  37. Blockburger v. United
    Search
  38. Gore v. United
    Search
  39. Thompson v. Carlson
    Search
  40. Abernathy v. United
    Search
  41. Johnson v. United
    Search
  42. Brisco v. United
    Search
  43. Kotz v. United
    Search
  44. Eller v. United
    Search
  45. U.S. Supreme Court Ralston v. Robinson
    Search
  46. II In Dorszynski v. United
    Search
  47. Durst v. United
    Search
  48. the Third Circuit, Thompson v. Carlson
    Search
  49. the Fourth Circuit, Outing v. Bell
    Search
  50. Outing v. Smith
    Search

AI Briefs · Semantic Search · Save & annotate judgments

Start your 7-day free trial