Hartman v. United States, 370 U.S. 724 (1962). · Go Syfert
Search
Hartman v. United States, 370 U.S. 724 (1962). Cases Citing This Book View Copy Cite
17 citation events across 5 distinct courts.
Strongest positive: Ghazi Abraham v. Louie L. Wainwright, Director, Division of Corrections, Tallahassee, Florida (ca5, 1969-02-24)
Top citers, strongest first. 3 distinct citers. How cited ↗
cited Cited "see" Ghazi Abraham v. Louie L. Wainwright, Director, Division of Corrections, Tallahassee, Florida
5th Cir. · 1969 · signal: see · confidence high
See Elchuk v. United States, 370 U.S. 722 , 82 S.Ct. 1574 , 8 L.Ed.2d 802 (1962).
discussed Cited "see" Wallace Leroy Schiers v. The People of the State of California
9th Cir. · 1964 · signal: see · confidence high
See Elchuk v. United States (1962) 370 U.S. 722 , 82 S.Ct. 1574 , 8 L.Ed.2d 802 , where on the suggestion of the Solicitor General, the matter was remanded “for further proceedings in which the petitioner is to be accorded the opportunity to present oral argument on the merits of his appeal, either personally or through counsel, to the same extent as such opportunity is accorded to the United States Attorney.” That case involved a federal conviction.
cited Cited "see" Charles Catalano v. United States
2d Cir. · 1962 · signal: see · confidence high
See Elchuk v. United States, 370 U.S. 722 , 82 S.Ct. 1574 , 8 L.Ed.2d 802 (1962).
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
Hartman
v.
United States
447 M.
Supreme Court of the United States.
Jun 25, 1962.
370 U.S. 724
Lawrence Speiser for petitioner., Solicitor General Cox, Assistant Attorney General Yeagley and George B. Searls for the United States.
Frankfurter, White, Clark, Russell.
Published
Per Curiam.

The motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis, the motion for leave to supplement the petition for certiorari and the petition for writ of certiorari are granted. The judgment is reversed. Russell v. United States, 369 U. S. 749; Silber v. United States, ante, p. 717.

Mr. Justice Frankfurter and Mr. Justice White took no part in the consideration or decision of this case. Mr. Justice Clark and Mr. Justice Harlan dissent for the reasons stated in their dissenting opinions in Russell v. United States, 369 U. S. 749, 779, 781.