green
Positive treatment
11.7 score
Treatment trajectory · 1964 → 2026 · click a year to view as-of
1964
1995
2026
Top citers, strongest first. 9 distinct citers.
How cited ↗
discussed
Cited as authority (rule)
Edwards v. Vannoy
On occasion, though, it extended the benefit of a new rule to litigants with final criminal judgments—sometimes only to the named petitioner in this Court, Jackson v. Denno, 378 U. S. 368, 377 (1964), other times to everyone laboring under a final judgment, McNerlin v. Denno, 378 U. S. 575, 575 (1964) (per curiam).
discussed
Cited as authority (rule)
Edwards v. Vannoy
On occasion, though, it extended the benefit of a new rule to litigants with final criminal judgments—sometimes only to the named petitioner in this Court, Jackson v. Denno, 378 U. S. 368, 377 (1964), other times to everyone laboring under a final judgment, McNerlin v. Denno, 378 U. S. 575, 575 (1964) (per curiam).
discussed
Cited as authority (rule)
Edwards v. Vannoy
On occasion, though, it extended the benefit of a new rule to litigants with final criminal judgments—sometimes only to the named petitioner in this Court, Jackson v. Denno, 378 U. S. 368, 377 (1964), other times to everyone laboring under a final judgment, McNerlin v. Denno, 378 U. S. 575, 575 (1964) (per curiam).
discussed
Cited as authority (rule)
Edwards v. Vannoy
On occasion, though, it extended the benefit of a new rule to litigants with final criminal judgments—sometimes only to the named petitioner in this Court, Jackson v. Denno, 378 U. S. 368, 377 (1964), other times to everyone laboring under a final judgment, McNerlin v. Denno, 378 U. S. 575, 575 (1964) (per curiam).
discussed
Cited as authority (rule)
Edwards v. Vannoy
On occasion, though, it extended the benefit of a new rule to litigants with final criminal judgments—sometimes only to the named petitioner in this Court, Jackson v. Denno, 378 U. S. 368, 377 (1964), other times to everyone laboring under a final judgment, McNerlin v. Denno, 378 U. S. 575, 575 (1964) (per curiam).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
State v. Rivens
(2×)
See, e.g., McNerlin v. Denno, 378 U.S. 575 , 12 L.Ed. 2d 1041 , 84 S.Ct. 1933 (1964) (rule in Jackson v. Denno applied retroactively to a pending case and the case was remanded for reconsideration in light of Jackson); Fahy v. Connecticut, 375 U.S. 85 , 11 L.Ed. 2d 171 , 84 S.Ct. 229 (1963) (Mapp exclusionary rule applied retroactively to a pending case.) The rationale for applying a decision to other cases pending on appeal appears to be the realization that the pending case could just as easily have been the case in which the new rule was announced. *392 In making the determination as to ret…
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
United States v. Kelly
(2×)
See also McNerlin v. Denno, 378 U.S. 575 , 84 S.Ct. 1933 , 12 L.Ed.2d 1041 (1964); Linkletter, supra, 85 S.Ct. 1743 n.20; Bruton v. United States, 391 U.S. 123 , 88 S.Ct. 1620 , 20 L.Ed.2d 476 (1968), [invalidating the conviction of one defendant based on a confession of a codefendant] was applied retroactively by the Supreme Court in Roberts v. Russell, 392 U.S. 293 , 88 S.Ct. 1921 , 20 L.Ed.2d 1100 (1968); Mempa v. Rhay, 389 U.S. 128 , 88 S.Ct. 254 , 19 L.Ed.2d 336 (1967), [right to counsel at sentencing] was applied retroactively by the Supreme Court in McConnell v. Rhay, 393 U.S. 2 , 89 S.…
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Linkletter v. Walker
(2×)
See also McNerlin v. Denno, 378 U. S. 575 , 84 S. Ct. 1933 , 12 L.
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Linkletter v. Walker
(2×)
See also McNerlin v. Denno, 378 U. S. 575 (1964).
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
McNERLIN
v.
DENNO, WARDEN.
v.
DENNO, WARDEN.
1117, Misc.
Supreme Court of the United States.
Jun 22, 1964.
Per Curiam.
Cited by 53 opinions | Published
ON PETITION FOR WRIT OF CERTIORARI TO THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SECOND CIRCUIT.
Richard J. Medalie for petitioner.
Louis J. Lefkowitz, Attorney General of New York, Samuel A. Hirshowitz, First Assistant Attorney General, and Ronald J. Offenkrantz, Assistant Attorney General, 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 United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit is vacated and the case is remanded for further proceedings in conformity 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.