Citation network
Emspak Vs. United States
Cites for this judgment
- US Supreme Court
- May 23, 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
-
Emspak v. UnitedSearch
-
States - 349 U.S. 190 (1955) U.S. Supreme Court Emspak v. UnitedSearch
-
States, 349 U.S. 190 (1955) Emspak v. UnitedSearch
-
was sufficient to invoke his constitutional privilege against self-incrimination. Quinn v. UnitedSearch
-
prosecution did not constitute an effective waiver or disclaimer of his privilege against self-incrimination. Smith v. UnitedSearch
-
s alleged membership in the Communist Party fell within the scope of the privilege against self-incrimination. Blau v. UnitedSearch
-
for a refusal to answer. Quinn v. UnitedSearch
-
reversed. MR. CHIEF JUSTICE WARREN delivered the opinion of the Court. This is a companion case to Quinn v. UnitedSearch
-
I As pointed out in Quinn v. UnitedSearch
-
an effective disclaimer of the privilege. We find this contention without merit. As this Court declared in Smith v. UnitedSearch
-
Petitioner's motions to dismiss the indictment were denied. United States v. EmspakSearch
-
United States v. EmspakSearch
-
United States v. MatlesSearch
-
Brief any citation in this list with AI Studio
-
Brief for United States, p. 33, in Quinn v. UnitedSearch
-
Petitioner's general sentence on all 68 counts was less than the maximum permissible on any count. See Sinclair v. UnitedSearch
-
United States v. DaisartSearch
-
Cf. United States v. WeismanSearch
-
See Hoffman v. UnitedSearch
-
Blau v. UnitedSearch
-
U. S. 458 , 304 U. S. 464 . See also, e.g., Glasser v. UnitedSearch
-
States, 315 U. S. 60 , 315 U. S. 70 , and Smith v. UnitedSearch
-
Hoffman v. UnitedSearch
-
States, 341 U. S. 479 , 341 U. S. 486 -487. Compare the test laid down in Arndstein v. McCarthySearch
-
United States v. CoffeySearch
-
States, 340 U. S. 159 . See also Brunner v. UnitedSearch
-
In United States v. SingletonSearch
-
with respect to three named individuals. This Court summarily reversed, 343 U.S. 944, citing Hoffman v. UnitedSearch
-
States, 341 U. S. 479 , and Greenberg v. UnitedSearch
-
the privilege may extend to questions of the sort involved here. See, e.g., Judge Learned Hand in United States v. WeismanSearch
-
Judge Augustus Hand in United States v. ZwillmanSearch
-
Chief Judge Denman in Kasinowitz v. UnitedSearch
-
Chief Judge Magruder in Maffie v. UnitedSearch
-
Judge Holmes in Estes v. PotterSearch
-
Judge Rives in Marcello v. UnitedSearch
-
Judge Martin in Aiuppa v. UnitedSearch
-
privilege in response to questions whether the witness knew Julius Zinman and Lou Malinow. See also Alexander v. UnitedSearch
-
Doran v. UnitedSearch
-
Healey v. UnitedSearch
-
Poretto v. UnitedSearch
-
United States v. GirgentiSearch
-
United States v. CoffeySearch
-
Daly v. UnitedSearch
-
States, 209 F.2d 232, 233. Cf. Kiewel v. UnitedSearch
-
United States v. DotoSearch
-
U.S. Supreme Court Emspak v. UnitedSearch
-
Quinn v. UnitedSearch
-
Smith v. UnitedSearch
-
See Sinclair v. UnitedSearch
AI Brief on cited cases - 7-day free trial