Lego v. Twomey, 401 U.S. 992 (1971). · Go Syfert
Search
Lego v. Twomey, 401 U.S. 992 (1971). Cases Citing This Book View Copy Cite
19 citation events across 15 distinct courts.
Strongest positive: Ronica R. Weigand v. Afton View Apartments (ca8, 1973-02-15) · Strongest negative: Hodges and Carter v. Metts, Kesselring and Boone, Hodges, Carter and Poll v. Landrieu and Porterfield (ca6, 1982-04-30)
Top citers, strongest first. 2 distinct citers. How cited ↗
discussed Cited "but see" Hodges and Carter v. Metts, Kesselring and Boone, Hodges, Carter and Poll v. Landrieu and Porterfield
6th Cir. · 1982 · signal: but see · confidence high
But see McGuane v. Chenango Court, Inc., 431 F.2d 1189 (2d Cir. 1970), cert. denied, 401 U.S. 994 , 91 S.Ct. 1238 , 28 L.Ed.2d 532 (1971); Weigand v. Afton View Apartments, 473 F.2d 545 (8th Cir. 1973).
discussed Cited "see" Ronica R. Weigand v. Afton View Apartments
8th Cir. · 1973 · signal: see · confidence high
See McGuane v. Chenango Court, Inc., 431 F.2d 1189, 1190 (2nd Cir. 1970), cert. denied, 401 U.S. 994 , 91 S.Ct. 1238 , 28 L.Ed.2d 532 (1971) ; McClellan v. University Heights, Inc., 338 F.Supp. 374, 382-383 (D.R.I.1972); McQueen v. Druker, 317 F.Supp. 1122, 1129-1131 (D.Mass.1970), aff’d in part, 438 F.2d 781, 785-786 (1st Cir. 1971).
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
Lego
v.
Twomey, Warden
No. 6046.
Supreme Court of the United States.
Mar 29, 1971.
401 U.S. 992
Published

C. A. 7th Cir. Motion of petitioner for leave to proceed in forma pau-peris granted. Certiorari granted limited to Question 1 as set forth in the petition, which reads as follows:

“1. Was the Illinois evidentiary rule for determining the voluntariness of extra-judicial confessions so highly unreliable as to contravene the Appellant’s Fourteenth Amendment Due Process rights and, necessarily, deprive the Appellant of the Fifth Amendment right against self-incrimination because:
“(a) The trial judge in his preliminary determination, removed from the jury, need not find the confession voluntary beyond reasonable doubt when judging its admissibility as evidence for the jury; and,
“(b) The defendant, as a matter of Illinois law, was precluded from having the jury instructed upon, and to determine the voluntariness of the confession along with the other factual issues upon which the jury verdict must rest?”