Citation network
Levine Vs. United States
Cites for this judgment
- US Supreme Court
- May 23, 1960
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
-
Levine v. UnitedSearch
-
States - 362 U.S. 610 (1960) U.S. Supreme Court Levine v. UnitedSearch
-
States, 362 U.S. 610 (1960) Levine v. UnitedSearch
-
of questions propounded to him by a federal grand jury. In every respect but one, this case is a replica of Brown v. UnitedSearch
-
definitive contempt. He chose to proceed just as he had two weeks earlier in the case of Brown, reviewed here as Brown v. UnitedSearch
-
Appeals, 267 F.2d 335, and we granted certiorari, 361 U.S. 860, limiting our grant to the question left open in Brown v. UnitedSearch
-
of 1789, 1 Stat. 73, 83. That power was recognized by this Court as early as 1812, in a striking way. United States v. HudsonSearch
-
Page 362 U. S. 616 effective alertness to check abusive exercises of that power by federal judges. See Cooke v. UnitedSearch
-
Offutt v. UnitedSearch
-
Cooke v. UnitedSearch
-
Cf. Snyder v. MassachusettsSearch
-
Cobbledick v. UnitedSearch
-
upon notice is held on the charge of contempt under Rule 42(b) of the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure. Brown v. UnitedSearch
-
the previously propounded questions, and the consequent adjudication and sentence, might occur in public. See Cooke v. UnitedSearch
-
Brief any citation in this list with AI Studio
-
the one-year prison sentence for criminal contempt here, like the three-year criminal contempt sentence in Green v. UnitedSearch
-
Green v. UnitedSearch
-
one of an independent body which even the judge shall not be allowed to interfere with or control. See, e.g., Stirone v. UnitedSearch
-
U. S. 43 , 201 U. S. 61 . See also Costello v. UnitedSearch
-
the public should not be excluded if we are to follow constitutional commands. In fact, I believe, as I said in Green v. UnitedSearch
-
keys in his pocket, so that he would be released immediately upon complying with the court's valid order, see Brown v. UnitedSearch
-
Adams v. UnitedSearch
-
in the publicity of adjudications of guilt of crime has been repeatedly pointed out judicially, see United States v. KobliSearch
-
Davis v. UnitedSearch
-
Neal v. StateSearch
-
that even the defendant's express consent should not suffice to permit proceedings to be had in secret. Kirstowsky v. SuperiorSearch
-
United Press Assns. v. ValenteSearch
-
United States v. SorrentinoSearch
-
courts that a showing of prejudice is not necessary for reversal of a conviction not had in public proceedings. Davis v. UnitedSearch
-
Tanksley v. UnitedSearch
-
United States v. KobliSearch
-
F.2d 919, 921. See People v. JelkeSearch
-
U.S. Supreme Court Levine v. UnitedSearch
-
of Brown v. UnitedSearch
-
Brown v. UnitedSearch
-
See Cooke v. UnitedSearch
-
of the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure. Brown v. UnitedSearch
-
Stirone v. UnitedSearch
-
Costello v. UnitedSearch
-
Kirstowsky v. SuperiorSearch
-
See People v. JelkeSearch
-
United States v. HudsonSearch
AI Brief on cited cases - 7-day free trial