Skip to content
Back to judgment

Citation network

Price Vs. Johnston

Cites for this judgment

  • US Supreme Court
  • May 24, 1948

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

73 entries 8 linked 65 unlinked
Show
  1. Kohl Vs. Lehlback US Supreme Court · Dec 23, 1895
  2. Collins Vs. Mcdonald US Supreme Court · Apr 10, 1922
  3. Pyle Vs. Kansas US Supreme Court · Dec 07, 1942
  4. Tomkins Vs. Missouri US Supreme Court · Jan 08, 1945
  5. Rice Vs. Olson US Supreme Court · Apr 23, 1945
  6. Whitney Vs. Dick US Supreme Court · Apr 30, 1906
  7. Schwab Vs. Berggren US Supreme Court · Feb 29, 1892
  8. Mooney Vs. Holohan US Supreme Court · Jan 21, 1935
  9. U.S. 266 (1948) U.S. Supreme Court Price v. Johnston
    Search
  10. U.S. 266 (1948) Price v. Johnston
    Search
  11. can have no bearing or weight on the disposition to be made of the new matter raised in the fourth petition. Salinger v. Loisel
    Search
  12. U. S. 224 , and Wong Doo v. United
    Search
  13. its opinion was devoted exclusively to the matters raised in the original petition. Price v. Johnston
    Search
  14. This Court denied the petition for a writ of certiorari. Price v. Johnston
    Search
  15. appeal, the opinion of the Circuit Court of Appeals being devoted to the matters decided by the District Court. Price v. Johnston
    Search
  16. a petition for certiorari, a petition which presented no issues differing from those raised in the lower courts. Price v. Johnston
    Search
  17. when he filed the earlier petitions, making the third petition an abusive use of the writ of habeas corpus. Price v. Johnston
    Search
  18. abuse its discretion in denying the fourth petition without a hearing. Reference was made in this respect to Salinger v. Loisel
    Search
  19. of course, is the pendency of a proceeding of an appellate nature to which the contemplated writ is auxiliary. Whitney v. Dick
    Search
  20. in the sense that the court could not otherwise physically discharge its appellate duties. Adams v. United
    Search
  21. Adams v. United
    Search
  22. that a prisoner be brought to the courtroom to argue his own appeal. That power has heretofore been assumed. Schwab v. Berggren
    Search
  23. Goldsmith v. Sanford
    Search
  24. Donnelly v. State
    Search
  25. has no absolute right to argue his own appeal, or even to be present at the proceedings in an appellate court. Schwab v. Berggren
    Search
  26. Hopt v. Utah
    Search
  27. U. S. 574 , and Snyder v. Massachusetts
    Search
  28. Hodge v. Huff
    Search
  29. and Long v. Benson
    Search
  30. such an expanded allegation states a sufficiently specific violation of due process within the meaning of Mooney v. Holohan
    Search
  31. change his testimony, and that this altered testimony was knowingly used to obtain petitioner's conviction. Cf. Pyle v. Kansas
    Search
  32. obtain the change in testimony. Petitioner was apparently trying to raise the due process issue formulated in Mooney v. Holohan
    Search
  33. that the prosecution knowingly used false testimony to obtain a conviction. That fact renders inapplicable Salinger v. Loisel
    Search
  34. can have no bearing or weight on the disposition to be made of the new matter raised in the fourth petition. Waley v. Johnston
    Search
  35. U. S. 101 . Likewise irrelevant to the instant proceeding is Wong Doo v. United
    Search
  36. determinations which may be decisive of vital rights where the crucial facts have not been developed. Cf. Kennedy v. Silas
    Search
  37. standards would have a retroactive and prejudicial effect on the prisoner's inartistically drawn petition. Cf. Holiday v. Johnston
    Search
  38. Price v. Moinet
    Search
  39. Swihart v. Johnston
    Search
  40. Since, upon the face of the petition, petitioner is not entitled to the writ, Walker v. Johnston
    Search
  41. the return, merely quoted the District Court's opinion denying the third petition for a writ of habeas corpus, Price v. Johnston
    Search
  42. corpus writ to enable a prisoner to defend himself in another proceeding or to argue motions in the trial court. Benns v. Mosley
    Search
  43. Weldon v. Neal
    Search
  44. Q.B.D. 471. See also Attorney General v. Hunt
    Search
  45. Ford v. Nassau
    Search
  46. Rex v. Parkyns
    Search
  47. Attorney General v. Cleave
    Search
  48. Clark v. Smith
    Search
  49. Bell v. United
    Search
  50. Barber v. United
    Search

AI Briefs · Semantic Search · Save & annotate judgments

Start your 7-day free trial