Skip to content
Try for free
Back to judgment

Citation network

Haley Vs. Ohio

Cites for this judgment

  • US Supreme Court
  • Jan 12, 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
AI Brief & Ask Semantic Search Verdict Lens Devil's Bench DocMind
Start free trial See sample brief

No card required · credentials emailed · Log in if you already have an account

37 entries 37 unlinked
Show
  1. U.S. 596 (1948) U.S. Supreme Court Haley v. Ohio
    Search
  2. U.S. 596 (1948) Haley v. Ohio
    Search
  3. certiorari which we granted because we had doubts whether the ruling of the court below could be squared with Chambers v. Florida
    Search
  4. Malinski v. New
    Search
  5. to one side the Page 332 U. S. 598 controverted evidence. Taking only the undisputed testimony ( Malinski v. New
    Search
  6. character of the confession do not foreclose the independent examination which it is our duty to make here. Ashcraft v. Tennessee
    Search
  7. even though, without the confession, there might have been sufficient evidence for submission to the jury. Malinski v. New
    Search
  8. form of the due process of law for which free men fought and died to obtain. The course we followed in Chambers v. Florida
    Search
  9. White v. Texas
    Search
  10. U. S. 530 , Ashcraft v. Tennessee
    Search
  11. supra, and Malinski v. New
    Search
  12. MR. JUSTICE FRANKFURTER, joining in reversal of judgment. In a recent series of cases, beginning with Brown v. Mississippi
    Search
  13. be deemed to be in conflict with deeply rooted feelings of the community. See concurring opinions in Malinski v. New
    Search
  14. York, 324 U. S. 401 , 324 U. S. 412 , and Louisiana ex rel. Francis v. Resweber
    Search
  15. persistent, long continued interrogation violates sentiments deeply embedded in the feelings of our people. See McNabb v. United
    Search
  16. Union Pacific R. Co. v. Public
    Search
  17. McNabb v. United
    Search
  18. a.m. United States v. Mitchell
    Search
  19. U. S. 65 . Cf. Anderson v. United
    Search
  20. Page 332 U. S. 623 The rule of law governing this case is stated in Lisenba v. California
    Search
  21. were affirmed in each with a single opinion emphasizing the separate consideration that had been given to each. Ohio v. Lowder
    Search
  22. Ohio v. Haley
    Search
  23. Ohio v. Parks
    Search
  24. Ohio App. 237, 72 N.E.2d 785. See also Ohio v. Haley
    Search
  25. Ohio v. Lowder
    Search
  26. United States v. Mitchell
    Search
  27. See Lisenba v. California
    Search
  28. U.S. Supreme Court Haley v. Ohio
    Search
  29. Chambers v. Florida
    Search
  30. White v. Texas
    Search
  31. and Malinski v. New
    Search
  32. Brown v. Mississippi
    Search
  33. Francis v. Resweber
    Search
  34. See McNabb v. United
    Search
  35. Cf. Anderson v. United
    Search
  36. Lisenba v. California
    Search
  37. Ashcraft v. Tennessee
    Search

AI Briefs · Semantic Search · Save & annotate judgments

Start your 7-day free trial
1M+ judgments indexed

Brief any judgment in 18 sections.

Search Supreme Court, High Courts, and tribunals - then open an AI Brief on any result. Core search is free; full AI desk free for 7 days.

Start 7-day free trial - no card Talk to Sales