Treatment trajectory · 1958 → 2026 · click a year to view as-of
1958
1992
2026
Top citers, strongest first. 10 distinct citers.
How cited ↗
discussed
Cited as authority (rule)
Gezmu v. United States
D.C. 91, 95, 264 F.2d 377, 381 (1958) (en banc), cert. denied, 359 U.S. 936 , 79 S.Ct. 652 , 3 L.Ed.2d 639 (1959), quoting Guy v. United States, 71 App.D.C. 89, 91-92 , 107 F.2d 288, 290-91 , cert. denied, 308 U.S. 618 , 60 S.Ct. 296 , 84 L.Ed. 516 (1939).
discussed
Cited as authority (rule)
Mills v. State
See Overholser v. O’Beirne, 112 U.S.App.D.C. 267 , 302 F.2d 852, 854-855 (1962) ; Starr v. United States, 105 U.S.App.D.C. 91 , 264 F.2d 377, 382-383 (1958) ; Newton v. Brooks 246 Or. 484 , 426 P.2d 446 (1966).
discussed
Cited as authority (rule)
Charles C. Rouse v. Dale C. Cameron, Superintendent, Saint Elizabeths Hospital
See Overholser v. Lynch, 109 U.S.App.D.C. 404 , 288 F.2d 388 (1961) (en banc), rev'd on other grounds, 369 U.S. 705 , 82 S.Ct. 1063 , 8 L.Ed.2d 211 (1962); Ragsdale v. Overholser, 108 U.S. App.D.C. 308, 281 F.2d 943 (1960); Hough v. United States, 106 U.S.App.D.C. 192 , 271 F.2d 458 (1959); Starr v. United States, 105 U.S.App.D.C. 91, 96-97 , 264 F.2d 377, 382-383 (1958) (en banc), cert. denied, 359 U.S. 936 , 79 S.Ct. 652 , 3 L.Ed.2d 639 (1959).
discussed
Cited as authority (rule)
Leroy Walker v. United States
(2×)
Rule 52(a); 5 28 U.S.C. 2111 (1958). 'This applies * * * unless a constitutional right is infringed.' Starr v. United States, 105 U.S.App.D.C. 91, 95 , 264 F.2d 377, 381 (in banc, 1958), cert. denied, 359 U.S. 936 , 79 S.Ct. 652 , 3 L.Ed.2d 639 (1959); Edmonds v. United States, 104 U.S.App.D.C. 144, 150 , 260 F.2d 474, 480 (1958) (dissenting opinion).
discussed
Cited as authority (rule)
Benjamin E. White v. United States
Kotteakos v. United States, 328 U.S. 750, 764-765 , 66 S.Ct. 1239 , 90 L.Ed. 1557 (1946); Starr v. United States, 105 U.S.. App.D.C. 91, 94-96, 264 F.2d 377, 380-382 (1958), cert. denied, 359 U.S. 936 , 79 S.Ct. 652 , 3 L.Ed.2d 639 (1959)..
discussed
Cited as authority (rule)
William C. Coleman v. United States
(2×)
Starr v. United States, 1958, 105 U.S. App.D.C. 91, 95, 96, 264 F.2d 377, 381, 382 , certiorari denied 1959, 359 U.S. 936 , 79 S.Ct. 652 , 3 L.Ed.2d 639 .
discussed
Cited "see"
Winfred Overholser v. Herbert T. O'Beirne
(2×)
See Starr v. United States, 1958, 105 U.S.App.D.C. 91 , 264 F.2d 377 .
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
In re J.H.
Opper, supra, 348 U.S. at 90-92, 75 S.Ct. 158 ; see also Starr v. United States, 105 U.S.App.D.C. 91 , 94 n. 3, 264 F.2d 377 , 380 n. 3 (1958) (observing that Opper requires corroboration for "those exculpatory statements which in fact are of the same character as confessions, i.e., statements of the accused denying guilt but admitting facts essential to prove the charge or admitting elements of the crime charged”). .
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
John J. Vaccaro v. United States
See, e. g., Starr v. United States, 1959, 105 U.S.App.D.C. 91 , 264 F.2d 377 , cert. denied, 359 U.S. 936 , 79 S.Ct. 652 , 3 L.Ed.2d 639 ; Wheeler v. United States, 1948, 82 U.S.App.D.C. 363 , 165 F.2d 225 , cert. denied, 333 U.S. 829 , 68 S.Ct. 448 , 92 L.Ed 1115; Green v. United States, 9 Cir., 1960, 282 F.2d 388 , cert. denied, 1961, 365 U.S. 804 , 81 S.Ct. 469 , 5 L.Ed.2d 460 ; Lewis v. United States, 5 Cir., 1967, 375 F.2d 772 ; United States v. Amadio, 7 Cir., 1954, 215 F.2d 605 , rev’d on other grounds, Amadio v. United States, 348 U.S. 892 , 75 S.Ct. 218 , 99 L.Ed. 701 ; Bartlett v. …
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
United States Ex Rel. Charles Glinton v. Wilfred L. Denno, Warden of Sing Sing Prison, Ossining, New York,respondent-Appellee
(2×)
See also Judge Bazelon’s dissent in Starr v. United States, 105 U.S.App.D.C. 91 , 264 F.2d 377 , certiorari denied 359 U.S. 936 , 79 S.Ct. 652 , 3 L.Ed.2d 639 , relying on Opper v. United States, 348 U.S. 84, 91-92 , 75 S.Ct. 158 , 99 L.Ed. 101 , and arguing that an exculpatory statement written by the defendant nine hours after arrest, but before arraignment, and introduced to counter an insanity defense should have been excluded under the MeNabb-Mallory rule.
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
John B. JACKSON, Appellant,
v.
UNITED STATES of America, Appellee
v.
UNITED STATES of America, Appellee
14489.
Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit.
Feb 26, 1959.
Mr. Robert E. Sher, Washington, D. C. (appointed by this court) for appellant., Mr. William A. Dougherty, Asst. U. S, Atty., with whom Messrs. Oliver Gaseh, U. S. Atty., and Carl W. Belcher, Asst. U. S. Atty., were on the brief, for appellee.
Edgerton, Bazelon, Bastían.
Cited by 1 opinion | Published
PER CURIAM.
Draper v. United States, 358 U.S. 307, 79 S.Ct. 329, 3 L.Ed.2d 327, requires us to hold that there was probable cause for appellant’s arrest without a warrant, that narcotics obtained from him by a search incidental to the arrest were rightly admitted in evidence against him, and tha ; his conviction must be affirmed.