Citation network
Carroll Vs. United States
Cites for this judgment
- US Supreme Court
- Jun 24, 1957
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
- Relied / Followed
-
Carroll v. UnitedSearch
-
States - 354 U.S. 394 (1957) U.S. Supreme Court Carroll v. UnitedSearch
-
States, 354 U.S. 394 (1957) Carroll v. UnitedSearch
-
United States v. HallSearch
-
Court. The Court of Appeals sustained its jurisdiction on the authority of its prior decision in United States v. CefarattiSearch
-
Cross v. UnitedSearch
-
in criminal cases are very few. The only decision of this Court applying to a criminal case the reasoning of Cohen v. BeneficialSearch
-
Brief any citation in this list with AI Studio
-
U. S. 541 , held that an order relating to the amount of bail to be exacted falls into this category. Stack v. BoyleSearch
-
the Government as well as the moving person has been permitted to appeal from an adverse decision. Burdeau v. McDowellSearch
-
indictment and in the district of trial has none of the aspects of independent just noted, as the Court held in Cogen v. UnitedSearch
-
Court for the District of Columbia, but no party can appeal an interlocutory order in such cases. In United States v. CefarattiSearch
-
as the successor to the nationally applicable appeal provisions of the Judicial Code. Cf. Stack v. BoyleSearch
-
to an independent peripheral matter such as would be appealable in other federal courts on the authority of Stack v. BoyleSearch
-
mandate than exists in the present terms and the historical development of the relevant provisions. Cf. United States v. BurroughsSearch
-
U.S.App.D.C. 297, 202 F.2d 13, as explained in United States v. StephensonSearch
-
Cobbledick v. UnitedSearch
-
state law of statutes in derogation of the common law principle against appeal by the prosecution, see United States v. SangesSearch
-
H.R.Rep. No. 45, 77th Cong., 1st Sess. 2-3. See also Palko v. ConnecticutSearch
-
of 1889 and 1891, there was no jurisdictional provision for appeal or writ of error in criminal cases. United States v. MoreSearch
-
United States v. SangesSearch
-
Stat. 828. But in United States v. SangesSearch
-
bring the case here through the certiorari jurisdiction that had also been created by the Act of 1891. United States v. DickinsonSearch
-
Cohen v. BeneficialSearch
-
Swift & Co. v. CompaniaSearch
-
E.g., Perlman v. UnitedSearch
-
GoBart Importing Co. v. UnitedSearch
-
Cf. Dier v. BantonSearch
-
E.g., Dickhart v. UnitedSearch
-
E.g., Steele v. UnitedSearch
-
United States v. KirschenblattSearch
-
Steele v. UnitedSearch
-
Dowling v. CollinsSearch
-
adopting 40 Stat. 228. That factor underlay the discussion of this category of orders as appealable in Cogen v. UnitedSearch
-
United States v. WallaceSearch
-
U. S. 801 -803. We think that a contemporary illustration of this category is United States v. PonderSearch
-
United States v. SangesSearch
-
Kepner v. UnitedSearch
-
United States v. JanitzSearch
-
United States v. WilliamsSearch
-
United States v. OneSearch
-
U.S. Supreme Court Carroll v. UnitedSearch
-
United States v. CefarattiSearch
AI Brief on cited cases - 7-day free trial