Citation network
Raffel Vs. United States
Cites for this judgment
- US Supreme Court
- Jun 01, 1926
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
-
Raffel v. UnitedSearch
-
States - 271 U.S. 494 (1926) U.S. Supreme Court Raffel v. UnitedSearch
-
States, 271 U.S. 494 (1926) Raffel v. UnitedSearch
-
bail, the authorities have given conflicting answers. Cases which support the government's position are Commonwealth v. SmithSearch
-
Mass. 411, and People v. PrevostSearch
-
Mich. 233. See also Taylor v. CommonwealthSearch
-
Sanders v. StateSearch
-
Tex.Cr.R. 156. Compare Garrett v. TransitSearch
-
Other cases take an opposite view, with perhaps less searching examination of the principles involved. See Parrott v. CommonwealthSearch
-
Newman v. CommonwealthSearch
-
Smith v. StateSearch
-
Parrott v. StateSearch
-
Wilson v. StateSearch
-
Tex.Cr.R. 505. And see People v. PrevostSearch
-
supra, 246 et seq. Compare Masterson v. TransitSearch
-
Brief any citation in this list with AI Studio
-
Garrett v. TransitSearch
-
testimony is one which the defendant may waive by offering himself as a witness. Page 271 U. S. 497 Reagan v. UnitedSearch
-
Fitzpatrick v. UnitedSearch
-
Powers v. UnitedSearch
-
Caminetti v. UnitedSearch
-
Gordon v. UnitedSearch
-
Austin v. UnitedSearch
-
witness, and, within the limits of the appropriate rules, he may be cross-examined as to the facts in issue. Reagan v. UnitedSearch
-
Tucker v. UnitedSearch
-
States, 5 F.2d 818. He may be examined for the purpose of impeaching his credibility. Reagan v. UnitedSearch
-
of which he may have knowledge may be the basis of adverse inference, and the jury may be so instructed. Caminetti v. UnitedSearch
-
the same immunity on the first trial would be probative of no fact in issue, and would be inadmissible. See Maloney v. StateSearch
-
Loewenherz v. Merchants'Search
-
Bunckley v. StateSearch
-
People v. WillettSearch
-
People v. PrevostSearch
-
trial, because Page 271 U. S. 499 his first silence may there be made to count against him. See People v. PrevostSearch
-
lest the jury, despite carefully framed instructions, draw an unfavorable inference from his silence. See State v. BartlettSearch
-
State v. CleavesSearch
-
U.S. Supreme Court Raffel v. UnitedSearch
-
Commonwealth v. SmithSearch
-
and People v. PrevostSearch
-
Taylor v. CommonwealthSearch
-
Compare Garrett v. TransitSearch
-
See Parrott v. CommonwealthSearch
-
People v. PrevostSearch
-
Compare Masterson v. TransitSearch
-
Reagan v. UnitedSearch
-
See Maloney v. StateSearch
-
See People v. PrevostSearch
-
See State v. BartlettSearch
AI Brief on cited cases - 7-day free trial