Citation network
Hilton Vs. Braunskill
Cites for this judgment
- US Supreme Court
- May 26, 1987
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. 770 (1987) U.S. Supreme Court Hilton v. BraunskillSearch
-
U.S. 770 (1987) Hilton v. BraunskillSearch
-
Petitioners subsequently moved the District Court to stay its order pending appeal. Relying on Carter v. RaffertySearch
-
In Carter v. RaffertySearch
-
to provide the State an opportunity to correct the constitutional violation found by the court. See, e.g., Rogers v. RichmondSearch
-
Dowd v. UnitedSearch
-
petition for certiorari, our approach has been to follow the general standards for staying a civil judgment. See Tate v. RoseSearch
-
Sumner v. MataSearch
-
Our decisions have consistently recognized that habeas corpus proceedings are civil in nature. See, e.g., Browder v. DirectorSearch
-
and (4) where the public interest lies. See, e.g., Virginia Petroleum Jobbers Assn. v. FPCSearch
-
Washington Metropolitan Area Comm'n v. HolidaySearch
-
Garcia-Mir v. MeeseSearch
-
Brief any citation in this list with AI Studio
-
Accident Fund v. BaerwaldtSearch
-
judgments in each case, the formula cannot be reduced to a set of rigid rules. The Court of Appeals in Carter v. RaffertySearch
-
permissible if the second and fourth factors in the traditional stay analysis militate against release. Cf. McSurely v. McClellanSearch
-
O'Bryan v. EstelleSearch
-
Ruiz v. EstelleSearch
-
appeal. We think that the District Court and the Court of Appeals, in relying on the latter's decision in Carter v. RaffertySearch
-
on the conclusion that the stay application was foreclosed by the Court of Appeals' prior decision in Carter v. RaffertySearch
-
that there are some circumstances where a civil rule of procedure should not govern habeas proceedings. See Harris v. NelsonSearch
-
see also Fed.Rule Civ.Proc. 81(a)(2). Neither Harris v. NelsonSearch
-
s danger to the community, the majority rejects the Third Circuit's well-reasoned decision to the contrary in Carter v. RaffertySearch
-
state court to consider a defendant's future dangerousness in determining whether to order pretrial confinement. State v. JohnsonSearch
-
immediate appellate review of its decision, and without satisfying any elevated burden of proof. Compare United States v. SalernoSearch
-
Ante at 481 U. S. 777 . See Bell v. WolfishSearch
-
Brown v. AllenSearch
-
Preiser v. RodriguezSearch
-
Rose v. LundySearch
-
Wainwright v. SikesSearch
-
U.S. Supreme Court Hilton v. BraunskillSearch
-
Carter v. RaffertySearch
-
See Tate v. RoseSearch
-
Browder v. DirectorSearch
-
Virginia Petroleum Jobbers Assn. v. FPCSearch
-
Cf. McSurely v. McClellanSearch
-
See Harris v. NelsonSearch
-
Neither Harris v. NelsonSearch
-
State v. JohnsonSearch
-
Compare United States v. SalernoSearch
-
See Bell v. WolfishSearch
-
United States v. SalernoSearch
-
Sumner v. MataSearch
-
Rogers v. RichmondSearch
AI Brief on cited cases - 7-day free trial