green
Positive treatment
8.2 score
Treatment trajectory · 1968 → 2026 · click a year to view as-of
1968
1997
2026
Top citers, strongest first. 13 distinct citers.
How cited ↗
discussed
Cited as authority (rule)
State v. Chabonian
(2×)
Ed. 2d 1037 . [18] State v. McLeod (1964), 1 Ohio St. 2d 60 , 203 N. E. 2d 349 . [19] McLeod v. Ohio, supra , footnote 15. [20] (1967), 389 U. S. 45 , 88 Sup. Ct. 234, 19 L.
discussed
Cited as authority (rule)
Mortimer Norman Koran v. United States
Lopez v. United States, 373 U.S. 427 , 83 S.Ct. 1381 , 10 L.Ed.2d 462 (1963) ; On Lee v. United States, 343 U.S. 747 , 72 S.Ct. 967 , 96 L.Ed. 1270 (1952) ; Harris v. United States, 400 F.2d 264 (5th Cir. 1968) ; Handsford v. United States, 390 F.2d 373 (5th Cir. 1968) ; Dryden v. United States, 391 F.2d 214 (5th Cir. 1968) ; Dancy v. United States, 390 F.2d 370 (5th Cir. 1968) ; Beatty v. United States, 377 F.2d 181 (5th Cir.), rev’d on other grounds, 389 U.S. 45 , 88 S.Ct. 234 , 19 L.Ed.2d 48 (1967) ; Hurst v. United States, 370 F.2d 161 (5th Cir. 1967). . 389 U.S. 347 , 88 S.Ct. 507 , 19 …
discussed
Cited "see"
State v. Richard Michael Arrington
See id. ¶101 The U.S. Supreme Court's cases therefore make clear that Arrington's Sixth Amendment right to counsel was violated when Miller, acting as an agent of the police, asked Arrington questions about his case and used the police-provided recording device to secretly record those conversations.
discussed
Cited "see"
Ramirez v. United States
(2×)
See Beatty v. United States, 389 U.S. 45 , 88 S.Ct. 234 , 19 L.Ed.2d 48 (1967) rev’g, 377 F.2d 181 (5th Cir.1967).
discussed
Cited "see"
State v. Carter
(2×)
See Beatty v. United States, 389 U.S. 45 , 88 S.Ct. 234 , 19 L.Ed.2d 48 (1967) (hidden government agent overheard conversations between accused and informant); United States v. Henry, 447 U.S. 264 , 100 S.Ct. 2183 , 65 L.Ed.2d 115 (1980) (defendant's cellmate, an informant for the FBI, was told by the government to pay attention to statements made by defendant); Maine v. Moulton, 474 U.S. 159 , 106 S.Ct. 477 , 88 L.Ed.2d 481 (C1985) (defendant's co-indictee/accomplice agreed to cooperate with the police and wore a wire transmitter to record his conversation with defendant).
discussed
Cited "see"
United States v. Eugene Muzychka
(2×)
See Beatty v. United States, 389 U.S. 45 , 88 S.Ct. 234 , 19 L.Ed.2d 48 (1967), rev’g per curiam Beatty v. United States, 377 F.2d 181, 188-90 (5th Cir.1967); United States v. Anderson, 523 F.2d 1192 , 1196 n. 3 (5th Cir.1975); Kamisar, Brewer v. Williams, Massiah, and Miranda: What is “Interrogation”?
examined
Cited "see"
United States v. James W. Melanson
(4×)
See Beatty v. United States, 389 U.S. 45 , 88 S.Ct. 234 , 19 L.Ed.2d 48 (1967) (per curiam); McLeod v. Ohio, 378 U.S. 582 , 84 S.Ct. 1922 , 12 L.Ed.2d 1037 (1964) (per curiam); Hancock v. White, 378 F.2d 479 (1st Cir. 1967).
examined
Cited "see"
United States of America Ex Rel. Joseph H. Milani v. Frank J. Pate, Warden
(4×)
See Beatty v. United States, 389 U.S. 45 , 88 S.Ct. 234 , 19 L.Ed.2d 48 (1967) (per curiam).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
State v. Berry
(2×)
See also Beatty v. United States, 389 U.S. 45 [, 88 S.Ct. 234 , 19 L.Ed.2d 48 ] (1967), reversing 377 F.2d 181 (CA 5th Cir.).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
United States Ex Rel. Chabonian v. Liek
(2×)
See also Beatty v. United States, 389 U.S. 45 , 88 S.Ct. 234 , 19 L.Ed.2d 48 (1967).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
United States Ex Rel. Lopez v. Zelker
(2×)
See also Beatty v. United States, 389 U.S. 45 , 88 S.Ct. 234 , 19 L.Ed.2d 48 (1967) (per curiam); McLeod v. Ohio, 381 U.S. 356 , 85 S.Ct. 1556 , 14 L.Ed.2d 682 (1965) (per curiam); United States v. Garcia, 377 F.2d 321 (2d Cir.), cert. denied, 389 U.S. 991 , 88 S.Ct. 489 , 19 L.Ed.2d 484 (1967); United States v. Accardi, 342 F.2d 697 (2d Cir.), cert. denied, 382 U.S. 954 , 86 S.Ct. 426 , 15 L.Ed.2d 359 (1965).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Miller v. California
(2×)
See also Beatty v. *626 United States, 389 U. S. 45 (1967), reversing 377 F. 2d 181 (C.
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
The People v. Milani
(2×)
We would agree with the First Circuit Court of Appeals that the action of the Supreme Court in McLeod indicates that Massiah “applies to exclude post-indictment incriminating statements of an accused to government agents in the absence of counsel even when not deliberately elicited by interrogation or induced by misapprehension engendered by trickery or deception.” (Hancock v. White (1st cir.) 378 F.2d 479, 482 ; see also People v. Halstrom, 34 Ill.2d 20 .) The United States Supreme Court’s recent reversal in Beatty v. United States, 389 U.S. 45 , 19 L.
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
Beatty
v.
United States
v.
United States
338.
Supreme Court of the United States.
Oct 23, 1967.
Robert S. Vance for petitioner., Acting Solicitor General Spritzer, Assistant Attorney General Vinson and Beatrice Rosenberg for the United States.
Harlan, White.
Cited by 79 opinions | Published
Per Curiam.
The petition for a writ of certiorari is granted and the judgment is reversed. Massiah v. United States, 377 U. S. 201.
Mr. Justice Harlan and Mr. Justice White dissent.