Citation network
Lee Vs. Madigan
Cites for this judgment
- US Supreme Court
- Jan 12, 1959
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. 228 (1959) U.S. Supreme Court Lee v. MadiganSearch
-
U.S. 228 (1959) Lee v. MadiganSearch
-
case and the impact of the particular statute involved, and it may have different meanings in different contexts. Kahn v. AndersonSearch
-
for the purposes of Article 92. That argument gains support from a dictum in Kahn v. AndersonSearch
-
of the other branches of Government, not the Judiciary. See Ludecke v. WatkinsSearch
-
peace had arrived. United States v. AndersonSearch
-
jurisdiction, that jurisdiction continues until the end of the trial and the imposition of the sentence. See Carter v. McClaughrySearch
-
as used in Article 92 were therefore quite unnecessary for the decision. Ludecke v. WatkinsSearch
-
enemy after hostilities have ended, but before the political branches have declared the state of war ended. Hamilton v. KentuckySearch
-
Brief any citation in this list with AI Studio
-
Woods v. CloydSearch
-
a source of regulatory authority over national affairs, in the aftermath of hostilities. The earlier case of McElrath v. UnitedSearch
-
Cf. Duncan v. KahanamokuSearch
-
offenses -- has a long history. We reviewed both British and American history touching on this point in Reid v. CovertSearch
-
Hale, History and Analysis of the Common Law of England (1st ed. 1713), 40-41. We spoke in that tradition in Toth v. QuarlesSearch
-
We think the proviso should be read generously to achieve that end. We refused, in Duncan v. KahanamokuSearch
-
In Givens v. ZerbstSearch
-
Prior to that time, only state courts could try a soldier for murder or rape. Coleman v. TennesseeSearch
-
We said in Toth v. QuarlesSearch
-
within the meaning of Article 92, I respectfully dissent. In Kahn v. AndersonSearch
-
Givens v. ZerbstSearch
-
as those or similar terms have been used from time to time by Congress in legislation. In McElrath v. UnitedSearch
-
did not exist until the Presidential Proclamation of August 20, 1866. See also United States v. AndersonSearch
-
Wall. 56. In Ludecke v. WatkinsSearch
-
Woods v. CloydSearch
-
the time this offense was committed. It is sufficient to say that this contention is also squarely foreclosed by Kahn v. AndersonSearch
-
supra, and that, in my opinion, nothing in Toth v. QuarlesSearch
-
U. S. 11 , or in Reid v. CovertSearch
-
U.S. Supreme Court Lee v. MadiganSearch
-
Kahn v. AndersonSearch
-
the Judiciary. See Ludecke v. WatkinsSearch
-
United States v. AndersonSearch
-
See Carter v. McClaughrySearch
-
Hamilton v. KentuckySearch
-
of McElrath v. UnitedSearch
-
Toth v. QuarlesSearch
-
Coleman v. TennesseeSearch
-
In Kahn v. AndersonSearch
-
In McElrath v. UnitedSearch
-
In Ludecke v. WatkinsSearch
-
Reid v. CovertSearch
AI Brief on cited cases - 7-day free trial