Citation network
United States Vs. Ball
Cites for this judgment
- US Supreme Court
- May 25, 1896
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. 662 (1896) U.S. Supreme Court United States v. BallSearch
-
U.S. 662 (1896) United States v. BallSearch
-
to take such further proceedings in relation to them as to Page 163 U. S. 665 justice might appertain. Ball v. UnitedSearch
-
Starkie, Cr.Pl. 320, note. In the leading American case of People v. BarrettSearch
-
Johns. 74. In Commonwealth v. PurchaseSearch
-
and therefore no bar to subsequent indictment and trial in a court which has jurisdiction of the offense. Commonwealth v. PetersSearch
-
upon an acquittal, the defendant, indeed, will not seek to have it reversed, and the government cannot. United States v. SangesSearch
-
against the two defendants who had been convicted, because no judgment can lawfully be entered on Sunday. Ball v. UnitedSearch
-
tends to promote the observance of the day more than would keeping the jury together until Monday. Hoghtaling v. OsbornSearch
-
Van Riper v. VanSearch
-
Huidekoper v. CottonSearch
-
Baxter v. PeopleSearch
-
Hiller v. EnglishSearch
-
Cory v. SilcoxSearch
-
Brief any citation in this list with AI Studio
-
Webber v. MerrillSearch
-
Reid v. StateSearch
-
Meece v. CommonwealthSearch
-
State v. FordSearch
-
although not followed by any judgment, is a bar to a subsequent prosecution for the same offense. United States v. SangesSearch
-
Commonwealth v. TuckSearch
-
West v. StateSearch
-
anew upon the same indictment, or upon another indictment, for the same offense of which he had been convicted. Hopt v. UtahSearch
-
Regina v. DrurySearch
-
Commonwealth v. GouldSearch
-
be tried together or separately was a question resting in the sound discretion of the court below. United States v. MarchantSearch
-
of any evidence introduced which was competent against one defendant, and incompetent against the others. See Sparf v. UnitedSearch
-
U.S. Supreme Court United States v. BallSearch
-
Ball v. UnitedSearch
-
of People v. BarrettSearch
-
In Commonwealth v. PurchaseSearch
-
Commonwealth v. PetersSearch
-
Sunday. Ball v. UnitedSearch
-
Monday. Hoghtaling v. OsbornSearch
-
United States v. MarchantSearch
-
See Sparf v. UnitedSearch
-
Hopt v. UtahSearch
AI Brief on cited cases - 7-day free trial