Treatment trajectory · 1967 → 2026 · click a year to view as-of
1967
1996
2026
Top citers, strongest first. 4 distinct citers.
How cited ↗
discussed
Cited "see"
State v. Briggs
See State v. Zeko, supra. This court continues to recognize, as stated in Zeko (p. 558), that the "infusion of `harmlessness' into error must be the exception." Under the facts of this case, however, we find that the error in allowing testimony regarding the defendant's post-Miranda warning silence was harmless beyond a reasonable doubt. *338 Lastly, the defendant claims error in the denial by the trial court of the defendant's motion for acquittal on the charge of kidnapping in the second degree. [3] The defendant urges us to adopt the merger doctrine of People v. Levy, 15 N.Y.2d 159 , 256 N.…
discussed
Cited "see"
Sinclair v. United States
(2×)
See People v. Levy, 15 N.Y.2d 159, 164 , 256 N.Y.S.2d 793, 796 , 204 N.E.2d 842, 844 , cert. denied, 381 U.S. 938 , 85 S.Ct. 1770 , 14 L.Ed.2d 701 (1965). 3 This is the precise factual situation which we have in the instant case.
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Hinds v. Commissioner of Correction
Where the requisite intent is present, the fact that the perpetra- tor’s underlying motive for the detention is the consum- mation of another crime, the prevention of his detection, or the facilitation of his flight, does not pre- clude a conviction for kidnapping.’’ [Citations omit- ted.]); see also State v. Briggs, 179 Conn. 328 , 338–39, 426 A.2d 298 (1979) (‘‘The defendant urges us to adopt the merger doctrine of People v. Levy, 15 N.Y.2d 159 , 256 N.Y.S.2d 793 , cert. denied, 381 U.S. 938 , 85 S. Ct. 1770 , 14 L.
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
State v. Ortiz
Although we are aware that other jurisdictions have determined that the crime of kidnapping must be found to be severable from, and not incidental to, an underlying crime for a defendant to be found guilty; see, e.g., People v. Levy, 15 N.Y.2d 159, 164-65 , 204 N.E.2d 842 , 256 N.Y.S.2d 793 , cert. denied, 381 U.S. 938 , 85 S. Ct. 1770 , 14 L.
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
Western Radio Corp.
v.
Federal Trade Commission
v.
Federal Trade Commission
No. 1079.
Supreme Court of the United States.
Jun 1, 1965.
Charles Rowan for petitioners. Solicitor General Cox, Assistant Attorney General Orrick, Robert B. Hummel, James Mcl. Henderson and Charles C. Moore, Jr., for respondent.
Published
C. A. 7th Cir. Certiorari denied.