Skip to content
Back to judgment

Citation network

Dunn Vs. United States

Cites for this judgment

  • US Supreme Court
  • Jan 11, 1932

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

67 entries 1 linked 66 unlinked
Show
  1. United States Vs. Ward US Supreme Court · Jun 27, 1980
  2. Dunn v. United
    Search
  3. States - 284 U.S. 390 (1932) U.S. Supreme Court Dunn v. United
    Search
  4. States, 284 U.S. 390 (1932) Dunn v. United
    Search
  5. which affirmed a judgment of the District Court upon a verdict of guilty under the National Prohibition Act. See Borum v. U.S
    Search
  6. the bar. The testimony, if believed, showed a regular course of business, which manifestly was continuous, Fisher v. United
    Search
  7. in the verdict is not necessary. Each count in an indictment is regarded as if it was a separate indictment. Latham v. The
    Search
  8. Selvester v. United
    Search
  9. offenses are separately charged in the counts of a single indictment, the same rule must hold. As was said in Steckler v. United
    Search
  10. Compare Horning v. District
    Search
  11. agents and their companions. No other sale was shown. No arrest, search, or seizure was then made or attempted. Marron v. United
    Search
  12. Blockburger v. United
    Search
  13. Barker v. United
    Search
  14. But mere possession for sale in a building of a half-dozen drinks does not measure up to the standard. Lewinsohn v. United
    Search
  15. Reynolds v. United
    Search
  16. Singer v. United
    Search
  17. Page 284 U. S. 398 Miller v. United
    Search
  18. Schechter v. United
    Search
  19. Fisher v. United
    Search
  20. and failed to characterize or name those charged in the others. Williams v. United
    Search
  21. Hammer v. United
    Search
  22. People v. Aro
    Search
  23. State v. Murray
    Search
  24. Samlin v. United
    Search
  25. Sparf & Hansen v. United
    Search
  26. Wallace v. United
    Search
  27. U. S. 399 This is not a failure of the jury to pass on all the counts submitted to them, as in Selvester v. United
    Search
  28. States, 170 U. S. 262 , and Latham v. The
    Search
  29. In civil cases, where there is conflict between a special and general verdict, the former will prevail. Lemke v. Chicago
    Search
  30. count would be, in principle and effect, a special finding negativing that element of the offense charged. Cf. People v. Piper
    Search
  31. Carroll v. Bohan
    Search
  32. Hawes v. Chicago
    Search
  33. N.W. R. Co., 41 Wis. 44, 51. Davis v. Town
    Search
  34. German Ins. Co. v. Smelker
    Search
  35. Commonwealth v. Call
    Search
  36. Commonwealth v. Eichelberger
    Search
  37. State v. Bray
    Search
  38. People v. Piper
    Search
  39. supra. No judgment may be entered upon an uncertain special verdict. People v. Olcott
    Search
  40. in law that no judgment can be entered thereon. Such verdicts are so meaningless as to be without force. Regina v. Evans
    Search
  41. Rosenthal v. United
    Search
  42. Commonwealth v. Haskins
    Search
  43. Tobin v. People
    Search
  44. Ill. 565. And see Commonwealth v. Lowrey
    Search
  45. Mass. 18, 20, 32 N.E. 940. Page 284 U. S. 401 In Regina v. Evans
    Search
  46. In Rosenthal v. United
    Search
  47. of riot against three, a verdict finding less than number guilty is void, for more than two must riot. Harison v. Errington
    Search
  48. Rex v. Heaps
    Search
  49. The King v. Sudbury
    Search
  50. Rex v. Scott
    Search

AI Briefs · Semantic Search · Save & annotate judgments

Start your 7-day free trial