Citation network
Solesbee Vs. Balcom
Cites for this judgment
- US Supreme Court
- Feb 20, 1950
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. 9 (1950) U.S. Supreme Court Solesbee v. BalcomSearch
-
U.S. 9 (1950) Solesbee v. BalcomSearch
-
Supreme Court affirmed, 205 Ga. 122, 52 S.E.2d 433, 436. The constitutional questions being substantial, see Phyle v. DuffySearch
-
to due process requirements of notice and hearing. The court cited as authority, among others, our holding in Nobles v. GeorgiaSearch
-
U. S. 398 . Compare Burns v. UnitedSearch
-
forbidden by the Fourteenth Amendment. See Francis v. ResweberSearch
-
and inherent differences between trial procedures and post-conviction procedures such as sentencing. Williams v. NewSearch
-
Nobles Page 339 U. S. 13 v. GeorgiaSearch
-
supra, at 168 U. S. 405 -406. See also Phyle v. DuffySearch
-
This issue was before the Court very recently, but, in the circumstances, the matter was not ripe for decision. Phyle v. DuffySearch
-
U. S. 431 . On the record before us, the issue must be met. Unlike the situation in Phyle v. DuffySearch
-
judgment under Page 339 U. S. 15 review leaves open the opportunity for a hearing which was given when Phyle v. DuffySearch
-
Brief any citation in this list with AI Studio
-
Jackman v. RosenbaumSearch
-
with the range of discretion vested in judges by penal laws carrying flexible instead of fixed penalties. See Williams v. NewSearch
-
that this Court has enforced again and again when mere interests of property were involved. See, e.g., Pennoyer v. NeffSearch
-
Priest v. BoardSearch
-
of the issue of insanity after sentence does not require the safeguards of a judicial proceeding. See Ng Fung Ho v. WhiteSearch
-
Insane persons do not have the capacity to plead or be tried. See Youtsey v. UnitedSearch
-
Forthoffer v. SwopeSearch
-
In re Smith, 25 N.M. 48, 59, 176 P. 819, 823. See also People v. GearySearch
-
after conviction but before sentence, and 1 has a provision dealing with insanity after conviction. Compare State v. AllenSearch
-
See Bulger v. PeopleSearch
-
See People v. GearySearch
-
People v. PrestonSearch
-
Ill. 11, 177 N.E. 761. (10) La.Code Crim.Law & Proc.Ann.Art. 267 (1943). See State v. AllenSearch
-
State v. GunterSearch
-
State v. HebertSearch
-
North Carolina. See State v. VannSearch
-
State v. GodwinSearch
-
State v. SullivanSearch
-
Supp. 1949). (13) South Carolina. See State v. BethuneSearch
-
Tennessee. See Jordan v. StateSearch
-
Bonds v. StateSearch
-
Williams 1934). (15) Washington. See State v. NordstromSearch
-
Grossi v. LongSearch
-
Alfani v. SuperiorSearch
-
State v. DavisSearch
-
See Howell v. KincannonSearch
-
Howell v. TodhunterSearch
-
Shank v. TodhunterSearch
-
See Phyle v. DuffySearch
-
Barrett v. CommonwealthSearch
-
Stucker v. CommonwealthSearch
-
Murrell v. CommonwealthSearch
-
See Bingham v. StateSearch
-
Supp. 1948). See Commonwealth v. BarnesSearch
-
U. S. 30 (27) Tex.Stat., Code Crim.Proc. arts. 921-927 (1948), Vernon's Ann.C.C.P. arts. 921-927. See Dotson v. StateSearch
AI Brief on cited cases - 7-day free trial