U.S. 281 (1958) Bartkus v. Illinois, 355 U.S. 281. · Go Syfert
Search
U.S. 281 (1958) Bartkus v. Illinois, 355 U.S. 281. Cases Citing This Book View Copy Cite
G Cite
cited 3× by 1 distinct case · "The defendant . . . has no standing in an appellate court to complain . . . unless the error contributed to the result reached by the jury."
cited 3× by 1 distinct case · “The defendant ... has no standing in an appellate court to complain ... unless the error contributed to the result reached by the jury.”
27 citation events (5 in the last 25 years) across 8 distinct courts.
Strongest positive: Commonwealth v. Cassidy (pasuperct, 1993-02-03)
Treatment trajectory · 1958 → 2026 · click a year to view as-of
1958 1992 2026
Top citers, strongest first. 2 distinct citers. How cited ↗
examined Cited as authority (quoted) Commonwealth v. Cassidy (2×)
Pa. Super. Ct. · 1993 · signal: see · quote attribution · 2 verbatim quotes · confidence high
the defendant . . . has no standing in an appellate court to complain . . . unless the error contributed to the result reached by the jury.
discussed Cited "see, e.g." Woodall v. Commonwealth (2×)
Ky. · 2002 · signal: see also · confidence low
See Tipton, supra; see also, Annotation, “Propriety and Effect of Asking Prospective Jurors Hypothetical Questions, on Voir Dire, as to How They Would Decide Issues of the Case.” 99 A.L.R.2d 7 ; see also Commonwealth v. Moon, 389 Pa. 304 , 132 A.2d 224 (1957), cert. dismissed, 355 U.S. 908 , 78 S.Ct. 335 , 2 L.Ed.2d 270 ; Commonwealth v. Everett, 262 Pa.Super. 61 , 396 A.2d 645 (1978).
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
BARTKUS
v.
ILLINOIS.
Supreme Court of the United States.
355 U.S. 281
1958 U.S. LEXIS 1681
2 passages pin-cited by 1 case
Pinpoint authority: bottom 67%
Citer courts: Superior Court of Pennsylvania (2)
CERTIORARI TO THE SUPREME COURT OF ILLINOIS.

Walter T. Fisher, acting under appointment by the Court, 352 U. S. 958, argued the cause and filed a brief for petitioner.

William C. Wines, Assistant Attorney General of Illinois, argued the cause for respondent. With him on the brief were Latham Castle, Attorney General, and Theodore G. Maheras, Assistant Attorney General.

PER CURIAM.

The judgment is affirmed by an equally divided Court.

MR. JUSTICE BRENNAN took no part in the consideration or decision of this case.