Skip to content
Back to judgment

Citation network

Stroble Vs. California

Cites for this judgment

  • US Supreme Court
  • Apr 07, 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

36 entries 10 linked 26 unlinked
Show
  1. Lyons Vs. Oklahoma US Supreme Court · Jun 05, 1944
  2. Pennekamp Vs. Florida US Supreme Court · Jun 03, 1946
  3. Craig Vs. Harney US Supreme Court · May 19, 1947
  4. Lisenba Vs. California US Supreme Court · Dec 08, 1941
  5. Avery Vs. Alabama US Supreme Court · Jan 02, 1940
  6. Gallegos Vs. Nebraska US Supreme Court · Nov 26, 1951
  7. Indiana Ex Rel. Anderson Vs. Brand US Supreme Court · Jan 31, 1938
  8. Frank Vs. Mangum US Supreme Court · Apr 12, 1915
  9. Turner Vs. Pennsylvania US Supreme Court · Jun 27, 1949
  10. Watts Vs. Indiana US Supreme Court · Jun 27, 1949
  11. U.S. 181 (1952) U.S. Supreme Court Stroble v. California
    Search
  12. U.S. 181 (1952) Stroble v. California
    Search
  13. on the issue of insanity. On appeal, the Supreme Court of California unanimously affirmed the conviction. People v. Stroble
    Search
  14. even though the evidence apart from that confession might have been sufficient to sustain the jury's verdict. Malinski v. New
    Search
  15. introduction of an involuntary confession, it must make an independent determination on the undisputed facts. Malinski v. New
    Search
  16. which this Court condemned in Watts v. Indiana
    Search
  17. See Lyons v. Oklahoma
    Search
  18. not faced with any question as to the permissible scope of newspaper comment regarding pending litigation, see Bridges v. California
    Search
  19. that he has been deprived of a fair trial, either through the use of a coerced confession or otherwise. Lisenba v. California
    Search
  20. for an interview with a client, upon the record before us, there is no showing of prejudice. As was said in Adams v. United
    Search
  21. See Grayson v. Harris
    Search
  22. International Steel & Iron Co. v. National
    Search
  23. Takahashi v. Fish
    Search
  24. In People v. Adamson
    Search
  25. People v. Stroble
    Search
  26. of later, so-alled voluntary confessions. I agree with my brethren that this view disregards our decision in Malinski v. New
    Search
  27. with assumptions and standards which are part and parcel of the ultimate issue of constitutionality. See Baumgartner v. United
    Search
  28. My views on the illegality of confessions obtained between the time of arrest and arraignment are contained in Watts v. Indiana
    Search
  29. Harris v. South
    Search
  30. the trial, the verdict of guilty must be set aside no matter how free of taint the other evidence may be. Malinski v. New
    Search
  31. U.S. Supreme Court Stroble v. California
    Search
  32. Malinski v. New
    Search
  33. Bridges v. California
    Search
  34. Adams v. United
    Search
  35. Anderson v. Brand
    Search
  36. See Baumgartner v. United
    Search

AI Briefs · Semantic Search · Save & annotate judgments

Start your 7-day free trial