Citation network
Lachance Vs. Erickson
Cites for this judgment
- US Supreme Court
- Dec 02, 1997
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. 262 (1997) October Term, 1997 Syllabus Lachance, Director, Office of Personnel Management V. EricksonSearch
-
employment-related misconduct. It is impossible to square the result reached below with the holding in, e. g., Bryson v. UnitedSearch
-
Lachance, Director, Office of Personnel Management v. McManusSearch
-
well established that a criminal defendant's right to testify does not include the right to commit perjury, e. g., Nix v. WhitesideSearch
-
U. S. 157 , 173, and that punishment may constitutionally be imposed, e. g., United States v. WongSearch
-
U. S. 174 ,178, or enhanced, e. g., United States v. DunniganSearch
-
U. S. 87 , 97, because of perjury or the filing of a false affidavit required by statute, e. g., Dennis v. UnitedSearch
-
Brief any citation in this list with AI Studio
-
or not, in order to avoid the more severe penalty of removal for falsification is entirely frivolous. United States v. GraysonSearch
-
an employee to a criminal prosecution, he may exercise his Fifth Amendment right to remain silent. See, e. g., Hale v. HenkelSearch
-
in ascertaining the truth or falsity of the charge, might take that failure to respond into consideration, see Baxter v. PalmigianoSearch
-
U. S. 308 , 318, but there is nothing inherently irrational about such an investigative posture, see Konigsberg v. StateSearch
-
agreed with the Board that no penalty could be based on a false denial of the underlying claim. 265 King v. EricksonSearch
-
even for purposes of impeachment. McManus v. DepartmentSearch
-
MSPR 564, 568 (1995). We granted certiorari in both cases, 521 U. S. 1117 (1997), and now reverse. In Bryson v. UnitedSearch
-
The core of due process is the right to notice and a meaningful opportunity to be heard. Cleveland Bd. of Ed. v. LoudermillSearch
-
It is well established that a criminal defendant's right to testify does not include the right to commit perjury. Nix v. WhitesideSearch
-
U. S. 41 , 54 (1978). Indeed, in United States v. DunniganSearch
-
jury under oath are likewise required to testify truthfully, on pain of being prosecuted for perjury. United States v. WongSearch
-
Similarly, one who files a 267 false affidavit required by statute may be fined and imprisoned. Dennis v. UnitedSearch
-
App. to Pet. for Cert. 16a-17a. But we rejected a similar claim in United States v. GraysonSearch
-
expose an employee to a criminal prosecution, he may exercise his Fifth Amendment right to remain silent. See Hale v. HenkelSearch
-
the truth or falsity of the charge, would take into consideration the failure of the employee to respond. See Baxter v. PalmigianoSearch
-
But there is nothing inherently irrational about such an investigative posture. See Konigsberg v. StateSearch
-
Syllabus Lachance, Director, Office of Personnel Management V. EricksonSearch
-
Bryson v. UnitedSearch
-
Lachance, Director, Office of Personnel Management v. McManusSearch
-
Dennis v. UnitedSearch
-
Konigsberg v. StateSearch
-
King v. EricksonSearch
-
McManus v. DepartmentSearch
-
In Bryson v. UnitedSearch
-
Cleveland Bd. of Ed. v. LoudermillSearch
-
See Hale v. HenkelSearch
-
See Baxter v. PalmigianoSearch
-
See Konigsberg v. StateSearch
AI Brief on cited cases - 7-day free trial