Citation network
Michel Vs. Louisiana
Cites for this judgment
- US Supreme Court
- Dec 05, 1955
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. 91 (1955) U.S. Supreme Court Michel v. LouisianaSearch
-
U.S. 91 (1955) Michel v. LouisianaSearch
-
Parker v. IllinoisSearch
-
Central Union Tel. Co. v. EdwardsvilleSearch
-
U. S. 314 . See Carter v. PageSearch
-
U. S. 94 Texas, 177 U. S. 442 . In Avery v. AlabamaSearch
-
In the light of Avery, a three-day minimum for such a motion is not unreasonable. Wilson Page 350 U. S. 95 v. LouisianaSearch
-
case, the application of such a rule may not give a reasonable opportunity to raise the federal question. See Reece v. GeorgiaSearch
-
Court of Louisiana explicitly upheld this finding. While such findings are not conclusive on this Court, Rogers v. AlabamaSearch
-
U. S. 226 , they are entitled to great weight, Fay v. NewSearch
-
Yakus v. UnitedSearch
-
had expired in March, 1951. Petitioner now contends that he was denied effective representation of counsel. Powell v. AlabamaSearch
-
timely motion to quash was not filed does not overcome the presumption of effectiveness. United States ex rel. Feeley v. RagenSearch
-
Brief any citation in this list with AI Studio
-
contention was not raised below, and we do not believe it has been properly put in issue, Pennsylvania R. Co. v. IllinoisSearch
-
and found support in the record, Page 350 U. S. 102 we might have a very different case here. See Rogers v. AlabamaSearch
-
Together with No. 36, Poret et al. v. LouisianaSearch
-
In State v. WilsonSearch
-
Such a construction has been adhered to, State v. ChianelliSearch
-
In dismissing the appeal from State v. WilsonSearch
-
Williams v. GeorgiaSearch
-
U. S. 375 , 349 U. S. 382 -383, and cases cited at note 6. See also Brown v. AllenSearch
-
Cf. Agnew v. UnitedSearch
-
held that systematic exclusion of Negroes from grand jury service violates the Federal Constitution. See Patton v. MississippiSearch
-
their guilt or innocence of charges that are separate and distinct from those upon which they are tried. See Hovey v. ElliottSearch
-
U. S. 409 . Cf. majority and dissenting opinions in National Union of Marine Cooks & Stewards v. ArnoldSearch
-
same unconstitutionally selected grand jury, I would vacate the conviction of Poret's codefendant Labat. See Ashcraft v. TennesseeSearch
-
U. S. 143 , 322 U. S. 155 -156, and 327 U. S. 327 U.S. 274, 327 U. S. 279 . Cf. Malinski v. NewSearch
-
execution. Without counsel, of course, he had no effective opportunity to raise the constitutional question. See Reece v. GeorgiaSearch
-
of the offense, and the time for raising objections to it expired with the impaneling, as was the case of Carter v. TexasSearch
-
indicted with Poret by the same grand jury whose composition is challenged on constitutional grounds. Cf. Ashcraft v. TennesseeSearch
-
U.S. Supreme Court Michel v. LouisianaSearch
-
See Carter v. PageSearch
-
In Avery v. AlabamaSearch
-
See Reece v. GeorgiaSearch
-
Court, Rogers v. AlabamaSearch
-
Fay v. NewSearch
-
Powell v. AlabamaSearch
-
Feeley v. RagenSearch
-
Pennsylvania R. Co. v. IllinoisSearch
-
See Rogers v. AlabamaSearch
-
State v. ChianelliSearch
-
State v. WilsonSearch
-
Brown v. AllenSearch
-
the Federal Constitution. See Patton v. MississippiSearch
-
See Hovey v. ElliottSearch
-
National Union of Marine Cooks & Stewards v. ArnoldSearch
-
Labat. See Ashcraft v. TennesseeSearch
-
Cf. Malinski v. NewSearch
AI Brief on cited cases - 7-day free trial