green
Positive treatment
4.1 score
Treatment trajectory · 1964 → 2026 · click a year to view as-of
1964
1995
2026
Top citers, strongest first. 4 distinct citers.
How cited ↗
discussed
Cited "see"
Commonwealth v. Robson
(2×)
See Commonwealth v. Senk, 412 Pa. 184, 193-94 , 194 A.2d 221 (1963), vacated on other grounds, 378 U.S. 562 , 84 S.Ct. 1928 , 12 L.Ed.2d 1039 (1964).
discussed
Cited "see"
United States of America Ex Rel. Edwin Gockley v. David N. Myers, Superintendent, State Correctional Institution, Graterford, Pennsylvania
(2×)
See Senk v. Pennsylvania, 378 U.S. 562 , 84 S.Ct. 1928 , 12 L.Ed.2d 1039 (1964) and Oister v. Pennsylvania, 378 U.S. 568 , 84 S.Ct. 1926 , 12 L.Ed.2d 1038 (1964).
discussed
Cited "see"
United States of America Ex Rel. Frank Earl Senk v. H. E. Russell, Superintendent, State Correctional Institution, Huntingdon, Pennsylvania
See, [Com. v. Senk] 378 U.S. 562 , 84 S.Ct. 1928 , 12 L.Ed.2d 1039 * * * (1964).” The issue of the voluntariness of the appellant’s confession made in the early morning hours of January 21, 1962, more than 50 hours after his arrest at 9:15 P.M. on January 18, 1962, was submitted to the state trial court on the previously made trial record, supplemented by a brief stipulation.
cited
Cited "see"
United States ex rel. Gockley v. Myers
See Senk v. Pennsylvania, 378 U.S. 562 , 84 S.Ct. 1928 , 12 L.Ed.2d 1039 (1964) which vacated and remanded Commonwealth v. Senk, 412 Pa. 184 , 194 A.2d 221 (1963) on authority of Jackson .
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
DEL HOYO
v.
NEW YORK.
v.
NEW YORK.
893, Misc.
Supreme Court of the United States.
Jun 22, 1964.
Per Curiam.
Cited by 3 opinions | Published
ON PETITION FOR WRIT OF CERTIORARI TO THE APPELLATE DIVISION, SUPREME COURT OF NEW YORK, FIRST JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT.
Leon B. Polsky and Edward A. Miller for petitioner.
Isidore Dollinger and Irving Anolik for respondent.
PER CURIAM.
The motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis and the petition for a writ of certiorari are granted. The judgment of the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Judicial Department, is vacated and the case is remanded for further proceedings not inconsistent with the opinion of this Court in Jackson v. Denno, ante, p. 368.
MR. JUSTICE BLACK, MR. JUSTICE CLARK, MR. JUSTICE HARLAN and MR. JUSTICE STEWART dissent for the reasons stated in their dissenting opinions in Jackson v. Denno, supra.