Citation network
GriffIn Vs. United States
Cites for this judgment
- US Supreme Court
- Oct 07, 1991
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
-
Griffin v. UnitedSearch
-
States - 502 U.S. 46 (1991) October Term, 1991 Syllabus Griffin V. UnitedSearch
-
of Appeals was a settled feature of the common law. Pp. 49-51. (b) The precedent governing this case is not Yates v. UnitedSearch
-
invalidated a general verdict when one of the possible bases of conviction was legally inadequate, but Turner v. UnitedSearch
-
proof, or of conspiring to defraud the DEA, for which (as the Government concedes) there was not. United States v. BeverlySearch
-
Claassen v. UnitedSearch
-
States, 142 U. S. 140 , 146 (1891) (quoting Peake v. OldhamSearch
-
Cowper 275, 276, 98 Eng. Rep. 1083 (K. B. 1775)) (other citations omitted). See also Snyder v. UnitedSearch
-
Clifton v. UnitedSearch
-
State v. ShelledySearch
-
State v. BurkeSearch
-
Commonwealth v. HolmesSearch
-
Brief any citation in this list with AI Studio
-
returned on multicount indictments where some of the counts were unsupported by the evidence, see, e. g., State v. LongSearch
-
State v. BugbeeSearch
-
King v. HuntSearch
-
pp. 355-356 (2d ed. 1913) (footnotes omitted). See, e. g., Crain v. UnitedSearch
-
Sanford v. StateSearch
-
State v. BreseeSearch
-
Morganstern v. CommonwealthSearch
-
Va. 787, 790,26 S. E. 402, 403 (1896). See also Schad v. ArizonaSearch
-
therefore, fails to support petitioner's claim under the Due Process Clause of the Constitution. See Murray's Lessee v. HobokenSearch
-
power over federal courts-a result contrary to the earlier practice has been prescribed by our decision in Yates v. UnitedSearch
-
supportable on one ground, but not on another, and it is impossible to tell which ground the jury selected. Stromberg v. CaliforniaSearch
-
Williams v. NorthSearch
-
Cramer v. UnitedSearch
-
of the three authorities cited for that expansive proposition in fact establishes it. The first of them, Stromberg v. CaliforniaSearch
-
on that ground. 54 The same principle explains the other two cases relied on by Yates. In Williams v. NorthSearch
-
Id., at 292. The third case cited by Yates, Cramer v. UnitedSearch
-
to general-verdict convictions that may have rested on an unconstitutional ground. See, e. g., Bachellar v. MarylandSearch
-
Leary v. UnitedSearch
-
Street v. NewSearch
-
U. S. 516 , 529 (1945). Cf. Zant v. StephensSearch
-
to the jury and the conviction is upheld as long as the evidence suffices to show one of them. See United States v. CramerSearch
-
to an indictment charging murder by shooting or drowning, where the evidence of drowning proves inadequate. See Schad v. ArizonaSearch
-
it also contradicts another case, postdating Yates, that in our view must govern here. Turner v. UnitedSearch
-
Id., at 420. Cf. United States v. MillerSearch
-
we have not yet applied the rule of that case to multiple-act conspiracies. That is questionable. See United States v. Socony-Search
-
exception to the Turner rule for multipleobject and multiple-overt-act conspiracies. See, e. g., United States v. BilzerianSearch
-
United States v. BeverlySearch
-
United States v. JohnsonSearch
-
F.2d 633 , 645-646, and n. 15 (CAll 1983), cert. denied sub nom. Wilkins v. UnitedSearch
-
United States v. WedelstedtSearch
-
United States v. JamesSearch
-
F.2d 999 , 1014 (CA5), cert. denied sub nom. Austin v. UnitedSearch
-
Moss v. UnitedSearch
-
Third Circuit, albeit without distinguishing, or even acknowledging the existence of, Turner. See United States v. TarnopolSearch
-
these are of course irrelevant. See, e. g., United States v. IrwinSearch
AI Brief on cited cases - 7-day free trial