green
Positive treatment
3.8 score
Treatment trajectory · 1969 → 2026 · click a year to view as-of
1969
1997
2026
Top citers, strongest first. 6 distinct citers.
How cited ↗
discussed
Cited as authority (rule)
People v. Epps
It also laid down procedures to be followed “[w]hen the prosecution proposes to introduce into evidence an extrajudicial statement of one defendant that implicates a codefendant, . . .” (Id. at pp. 530-531, and see I-B below.) In defining “extrajudicial statements implicating any codefendant” which could be deleted, the court stated; “By effective deletions, we mean not only direct and indirect identifications of codefendants but any statements that could be employed against nondeclarant codefendants once their identity is otherwise established.” (Id. at p. 530, fn. omitted. 5 ) In…
discussed
Cited "see"
Mirza v. Filmore Corp.
(2×)
See Roberts v. Russell, 392 U.S. 293, 295 , 88 S.Ct. 1921, 1922 , 20 L.Ed. 2d 1100 , reh'g denied, 393 U.S. 899 , 89 S.Ct. 73 , 21 L.Ed. 2d 191 (1968), where the Supreme Court retroactively applied its ruling that extrajudicial confessions of one defendant implicating a codefendant were inadmissible at joint trial; "[t]he element of reliance is not persuasive, for ... [the former rule] has been under attack from its inception and many courts have in fact rejected it." See Wangler v. Harvey, 41 N.J. 277 (1963), where the Court held that its ruling, abrogating the immunity from service of nonres…
discussed
Cited "see"
United States v. Jack Casebeer Wood, III
See Cochran v. United States, 389 F.2d 326, 327 (10th Cir.), cert. denied, 391 U.S. 913 , 88 S.Ct. 1808 , 20 L.Ed.2d 653 , rehearing denied, 393 U.S. 899 , 89 S.Ct. 70 , 21 L.Ed.2d 187 (1968); Sanchez v. United States, 311 F.2d 327, 329-330 (9th Cir. 1962), cert. denied, 373 U.S. 949 , 83 S.Ct. 1678 , 10 L.Ed.2d 704 (1963).
cited
Cited "see"
United States Ex Rel. Joseph Annunziato v. John T. Deegan, Warden, Sing Sing Prison
See People v. Goldman, 21 N.Y.2d 152 , 287 N.Y.S.2d 7 , 234 N.E.2d 194 (1967), appeal dismissed for want of substantial federal question, 392 U.S. 643 (1968), rehearing denied, 393 U.S. 899 (1968).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
WURTH BY WURTH v. City of Philadelphia
See, e.g., Greenberg v. Aetna Insurance Co., 427 Pa. 511 , 235 A.2d 576 (1967), cert. denied, Scarselletti v. Aetna Casualty & Surety Co., 392 U.S. 907 , 88 S.Ct. 2063 , 20 L.Ed.2d 1366 (1968), reh’g denied, 393 U.S. 899 , 89 S.Ct. 72 , 21 L.Ed.2d 187 (1968); Dorsch v. Butler Area School District, 105 Pa.Commonwealth Ct. 519, 525 A.2d 17 (1987); Harris v. Rundle, 27 Pa.Commonwealth Ct. 445, 366 A.2d 970 (1976). 2 .
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Gregory White v. Ross Maggio, Warden, Louisiana State Penitentiary
Stovall v. Denno, 1967, 388 U.S. 293, 298 , 87 S.Ct. 1967, 1970 , 18 L.Ed.2d 1199 ; Blackburn v. Cross, 5 Cir. 1975, 510 F.2d 1014, 1018 , rehearing denied, 517 F.2d 464 ; see, e. g., Roberts v. Russell, 1968, 392 U.S. 293 , 88 S.Ct. 1921 , 20 L.Ed.2d 1100 , rehearing denied, 393 U.S. 899 , 89 S.Ct. 73 , 21 L.Ed.2d 191 ; Jackson v. Denno, 1964, 378 U.S. 368 , 84 S.Ct. 1774 , 12 L.Ed.2d 908 . 3 Consideration of the purpose of the rule dominates the application of the three-pronged test.
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
Goldman
v.
New York Cochran v. United States Hagerty v. Louisiana Skolnick v. Moses O'Kelley v. California Scarselletti v. Aetna Casualty & Surety Co. Roberts v. Russell Wolff v. Foley West v. McMann, Warden Hobbs v. Frye, Warden Carroll v. Texas Kozuck et ux. v. Lal Construction Co. Hodge v. Tennessee Bercera-Soto v. United States Jackson v. United States Watson v. Common Pleas Court of Philadelphia Siegal v. United States
v.
New York Cochran v. United States Hagerty v. Louisiana Skolnick v. Moses O'Kelley v. California Scarselletti v. Aetna Casualty & Surety Co. Roberts v. Russell Wolff v. Foley West v. McMann, Warden Hobbs v. Frye, Warden Carroll v. Texas Kozuck et ux. v. Lal Construction Co. Hodge v. Tennessee Bercera-Soto v. United States Jackson v. United States Watson v. Common Pleas Court of Philadelphia Siegal v. United States
No. 1261; No. 1289; No. 1319; No. 1330; No. 1343; No. 1452; No. 920; No. 969; No. 1030; No. 1198; No. 1224; No. 1262; No. 1309; No. 1363; No. 1401; No. 1447; No. 1482.
Supreme Court of the United States.
Oct 14, 1968.
393 U.S. 899
Cited by 34 opinions | Published
Opinion text not yet available. Try Google Scholar