Citation network
Knapp Vs. Schweitzer
Cites for this judgment
- US Supreme Court
- Jun 30, 1958
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. 371 (1958) U.S. Supreme Court Knapp v. SchweitzerSearch
-
U.S. 371 (1958) Knapp v. SchweitzerSearch
-
People v. KnappSearch
-
that such a claim is without merit was settled in Twining v. NewSearch
-
Malinski v. NewSearch
-
the claim that such state law of immunity may expose the potential witness to prosecution under federal law. See Jack v. KansasSearch
-
protection of the Fifth Amendment would come into play. Such testimony is barred in a federal prosecution, see Byars v. UnitedSearch
-
Whatever the applicability of the Fifth Amendment, it is in no way expanded by those two provisions. Cf. Twining v. NewSearch
-
Barron v. BaltimoreSearch
-
Permoli v. FirstSearch
-
Brief any citation in this list with AI Studio
-
Smith v. MarylandSearch
-
Fox v. OhioSearch
-
Twitchell v. PennsylvaniaSearch
-
Eilenbecker v. PlymouthSearch
-
Eilenbecker v. DistrictSearch
-
Livingston's Lessee v. MooreSearch
-
Justices v. MurraySearch
-
Pervear v. MassachusettsSearch
-
incrimination under the Fifth Amendment. I therefore do not believe that reconsideration of the holding in Feldman v. UnitedSearch
-
Lochner v. NewSearch
-
in this Court that the petitioner does run the risk of a federal prosecution based on his own testimony under Feldman v. UnitedSearch
-
do so does violence to the vital principle of federalism that a state court is the final arbiter of state law. See May v. AndersonSearch
-
assumption that his testimony could not be used to convict him of a federal crime. See Standard Oil Co. of California v. JohnsonSearch
-
U. S. 481 . Cf. Patterson v. AlabamaSearch
-
I think it is also appropriate to say a few words here about Feldman v. UnitedSearch
-
imprisonment for contempt or confess Page 357 U. S. 385 himself into a federal penitentiary. See Marcello v. UnitedSearch
-
States, 196 F.2d 437. Indeed things have now reached the point, as the result of United States v. MurdockSearch
-
and federal law even though there is a privilege against self-incrimination in the Constitution of each. Cf. Irvine v. CaliforniaSearch
-
the witness under federal law, even though he has been granted full immunity from state prosecution. People v. Den-UylSearch
-
Mich. 645, 29 N.W.2d 284. Cf. State ex rel. Doran v. DoranSearch
-
Contrast Bram v. UnitedSearch
-
prosecution even though it was procured by officers of a foreign nation outside the United States. And see Ashcraft v. TennesseeSearch
-
U.S. Supreme Court Knapp v. SchweitzerSearch
-
Twining v. NewSearch
-
See Jack v. KansasSearch
-
Byars v. UnitedSearch
-
Cf. Twining v. NewSearch
-
Feldman v. UnitedSearch
-
See May v. AndersonSearch
-
See Standard Oil Co. of California v. JohnsonSearch
-
Cf. Patterson v. AlabamaSearch
-
See Marcello v. UnitedSearch
-
of United States v. MurdockSearch
-
Cf. Irvine v. CaliforniaSearch
-
People v. Den-UylSearch
AI Brief on cited cases - 7-day free trial