Skip to content
Back to judgment

Citation network

Casey Vs. United States

Cites for this judgment

  • US Supreme Court
  • Jun 09, 1952

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

43 entries 4 linked 39 unlinked
Show
  1. Marino Vs. Ragen US Supreme Court · Dec 22, 1947
    Relied / Followed
  2. United States Vs. Jeffers US Supreme Court · Nov 13, 1951
  3. Wong Yang Sung Vs. Mcgrath US Supreme Court · Feb 20, 1950
    Relied / Followed
  4. Mandoli Vs. Acheson US Supreme Court · Nov 24, 1952
  5. Casey v. United
    Search
  6. States - 343 U.S. 808 (1952) U.S. Supreme Court Casey v. United
    Search
  7. States, 343 U.S. 808 (1952) Casey v. United
    Search
  8. cause of the litigant. The practice in cases in which the Solicitor General confesses error was settled by Young v. United
    Search
  9. to great weight, but our judicial obligations compel us to examine independently the errors confessed. See Parlton v. United
    Search
  10. and the proper administration of the criminal law cannot be left merely to the stipulation of parties. Cf. Rex v. Wilkes
    Search
  11. State v. Green
    Search
  12. The principles announced in Young v. United
    Search
  13. States, supra, were expressly reaffirmed in Gibson v. United
    Search
  14. States, 329 U. S. 338 , 329 U. S. 344 , cf. Marino v. Ragen
    Search
  15. complain of the search. That ruling is questionable in view of the intervening decision of this Court in United States v. Jeffers
    Search
  16. of search and seizure. The facts are not in dispute. The only question is the reach of our decision in Carroll v. United
    Search
  17. During the same term of Court as Young v. United
    Search
  18. States, supra, the Government also confessed error in Weber v. United
    Search
  19. In Upshaw v. United
    Search
  20. confessed error in the Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia. That court, adhering to its precedent in Parlton v. United
    Search
  21. States, 64 App.D.C. 169, 75 F.2d 772 (1935), cited with approval in Young v. United
    Search
  22. Cates v. Haderlein
    Search
  23. Chiarella v. United
    Search
  24. Ryles v. United
    Search
  25. Bellaskus v. Crossman
    Search
  26. Fogel v. United
    Search
  27. Wixman v. United
    Search
  28. Mogall v. United
    Search
  29. General does not oppose the granting of a petition for certiorari is entitled to respect, see, e.g., Wong Yang Sung v. McGrath
    Search
  30. automatically grant certiorari because of the Government's consent to such action. E.g., Community Services, Inc. v. United
    Search
  31. Dollar v. United
    Search
  32. being that the methods of expatriation listed in the Nationality Act of 1940, 54 Stat. 1168, were exclusive. Kawakita v. United
    Search
  33. of affirmance being that methods of expatriation listed in the Nationality Act of 1940 were not exclusive. Mandoli v. Acheson
    Search
  34. U.S. Supreme Court Casey v. United
    Search
  35. Young v. United
    Search
  36. See Parlton v. United
    Search
  37. Cf. Rex v. Wilkes
    Search
  38. Gibson v. United
    Search
  39. Carroll v. United
    Search
  40. Weber v. United
    Search
  41. Parlton v. United
    Search
  42. E.g., Community Services, Inc. v. United
    Search
  43. Kawakita v. United
    Search

AI Briefs · Semantic Search · Save & annotate judgments

Start your 7-day free trial