Skip to content
Back to judgment

Citation network

Patton Vs. Yount

Cites for this judgment

  • US Supreme Court
  • Jun 26, 1984

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

56 entries 5 linked 51 unlinked
Show
  1. Murphy Vs. Florida US Supreme Court · Jun 16, 1975
  2. Rideau Vs. Louisiana US Supreme Court · Jun 03, 1963
  3. United States Vs. Burr US Supreme Court · Jun 03, 1895
    Relied / Followed
  4. Townsend Vs. Sain US Supreme Court · Mar 18, 1963
  5. Rushen Vs. Spain US Supreme Court · Dec 12, 1983
  6. U.S. 1025 (1984) U.S. Supreme Court Patton v. Yount
    Search
  7. U.S. 1025 (1984) Patton v. Yount
    Search
  8. jury was impartial, the District Court denied relief, but the Court of Appeals reversed. Relying primarily on Irvin v. Dowd
    Search
  9. that would have made a fair trial unlikely by the empaneled jury as a whole. Although Irvin v. Dowd
    Search
  10. he was sentenced to life imprisonment. On direct appeal, the Pennsylvania Supreme Court determined that, under Miranda v. Arizona
    Search
  11. notice of his right to an attorney prior to his confession. The court remanded for a new trial. Commonwealth v. Yount
    Search
  12. was without bias. The Pennsylvania Supreme Court affirmed the conviction and the trial court's findings. Commonwealth v. Yount
    Search
  13. for the Third Circuit reversed. 710 F.2d 956 (1983). The court relied primarily on the analysis set out in Irvin v. Dowd
    Search
  14. As noted, the Court of Appeals rested its decision that the jury was not impartial on this Court's decision in Irvin v. Dowd
    Search
  15. Tr. 771, 959, 1027. That time soothes and erases is a perfectly natural phenomenon, familiar to all. See Irvin v. Dowd
    Search
  16. d) does not apply. The opinions below relied for this proposition on Irvin v. Dowd
    Search
  17. decide the case on the evidence, and should the juror's protestation of impartiality have been believed. Cf. Rushen v. Spain
    Search
  18. biased veniremen. It is fair to assume that the method we have relied on since the beginning, e.g., United States v. Burr
    Search
  19. U. S. 500 (1984). The respect paid such findings in a habeas proceeding certainly should be no less. See Marshall v. Lonberger
    Search
  20. cause only three of the actual jurors. In Irvin, the defendant challenged each of his 12 jurors for cause. Irvin v. Dowd
    Search
  21. factual findings, see Pub.L. 89-711, 80 Stat. 1105-1106, and two years before this Court's opinion in Townsend v. Sain
    Search
  22. in Irvin do not appear to be significantly less probing than those here. See Brief for Petitioner in Irvin v. Dowd
    Search
  23. In Murphy v. Florida
    Search
  24. to which habeas courts owe special deference, see Rushen, 464 U.S. at 464 U. S. 120 . Cf. Marshall v. Lonberger
    Search
  25. U. S. 431 -432 (1983) (similar analysis as to whether a guilty plea was voluntary). See also Reynolds v. United
    Search
  26. the latter may be set aside only for manifest error). The dissent misreads the Court's opinion in Reynolds v. United
    Search
  27. United States v. Duncan
    Search
  28. Calley v. Callaway
    Search
  29. F.2d 184, 209, n. 45 (CA5 1975) (en banc) (citing cases), cert. denied sub nom Calley v. Hoffman
    Search
  30. U.S. 911 (1976). But cf. Smith v. Phillips
    Search
  31. In 1969, a divided Supreme Court of Pennsylvania reversed Yount's conviction and ordered a new trial. Commonwealth v. Yount
    Search
  32. I do not believe that the jury was capable of deciding the case solely on the evidence before it. Smith v. Phillips
    Search
  33. ante at 467 U. S. 1037 , n. 12, and cites as one authority Reynolds v. United
    Search
  34. has a disqualifying opinion is a mixed question of law and fact. The proper starting point of analysis is Reynolds v. United
    Search
  35. Id. at 98 U. S. 155 -156. Irvin v. Dowd
    Search
  36. ibid. (quoting Reynolds v. United
    Search
  37. Id. at 98 U. S. 156 -157 (emphasis added). The Court also cites as authority Rushen v. Spain
    Search
  38. U. S. 114 (1983) (per curiam), and Marshall v. Lonberger
    Search
  39. the Court made sure that an apparently guilty defendant was not given too much protection by the law. See Florida v. Meyers
    Search
  40. and n. 3 (1984). The string of consecutive summary victories for the prosecution now stands at 20. See Massachusetts v. Upton
    Search
  41. U.S. Supreme Court Patton v. Yount
    Search
  42. Although Irvin v. Dowd
    Search
  43. Miranda v. Arizona
    Search
  44. Commonwealth v. Yount
    Search
  45. See Irvin v. Dowd
    Search
  46. Cf. Rushen v. Spain
    Search
  47. See Marshall v. Lonberger
    Search
  48. Cf. Marshall v. Lonberger
    Search
  49. Reynolds v. United
    Search
  50. Calley v. Hoffman
    Search

AI Briefs · Semantic Search · Save & annotate judgments

Start your 7-day free trial