18 U.S.C. § 3772
Sexual assault survivors’ rights
Section 1402(d)(3)(A)(i) of the Victims of Crime Act of 1984, referred to in subsec. (d), is section 1402(d)(3)(A)(i) of chapter XIV of title II of Pub. L. 98–473, which was classified to section 10601(d)(3)(A)(i) of Title 42, The Public Health and Welfare, prior to editorial reclassification as section 20101(d)(3)(A)(i) of Title 34, Crime Control and Law Enforcement.
A prior section 3772, acts June 25, 1948, ch. 645, 62 Stat. 846; May 24, 1949, ch. 139, § 60, 63 Stat. 98;
2022—Subsec. (a)(2)(D). Pub. L. 117–103 added subpar. (D).
Amendment by Pub. L. 117–103 not effective until Oct. 1 of the first fiscal year beginning after
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 20
cases (1 in the last 5 years), 1956–2022 · leading case: Schacht v. United States, 398 U.S. 58 (1970).
Schacht v. United States, 398 U.S. 58 (1970). “See 18 U. S. C. § 3772 ; Rule 37, Fed. Rules Crim.”
Young v. United States Ex Rel. Vuitton Et Fils S. A., 481 U.S. 787 (1987). “See 18 U. S. C. § 3772 (1982 ed. and Supp. III).”
United States v. Robinson, 361 U.S. 220 (1960). “2047, 72d Cong., 2d Sess., to accompany S. 4020. The first Criminal Appeals Rules promulgated under that Act were the 13 Rules effective September 1, 1934.”
Georgia v. Rachel, 384 U.S. 780 (1966). “904 , as amended, 18 U. S. C. § 3772 (1964 ed.). See 327 U.”
United States v. Henry, 709 F.2d 298 (5th Cir. 1983). “399 (current and virtually unamended version at 18 U.S.C. § 3772 (1976)), which, unlike many rules enabling acts, authorizes the Supreme Court to put postverdict procedural rules into immediate effect without first submitting them to Congress for approval or possible veto.”
United States v. Anthony Provenzano, in No. 79-1912, & Thomas Andretta, in No. 79-1913, 605 F.2d 85 (3rd Cir. 1979). “18 U.S.C. § 3772 (1976) authorizes the Supreme Court of the United States to prescribe “rules of practice and procedure with respect to any or all proceedings after verdict.”
Robert Bruce Furman v. United States, 720 F.2d 263 (2d Cir. 1983). “Rule 36 of the Federal Rules of Appellate Procedure, adopted pursuant in part to 18 U.S.C. § 3772 , expressly contemplates that some appeals will be decided without an opinion.”
United States v. Anthony J. Pivorotto, John Robert Woods. John Robert Woods, 986 F.2d 669 (3rd Cir. 1993). “399 (current version at 18 U.S.C. § 3772 ). The Advisory Committee Notes to the rule explain only that the rule was intended to “continue[] existing [decisional] law.”
United States v. Brett C. Kimberlin, 776 F.2d 1344 (7th Cir. 1985). “§ 3772 (1976), the Congress gave the Supreme Court of the United States power to prescribe “rules of practice and procedure with respect to any or all proceedings after verdict____” Further, this section provides that the "Supreme Court may fix the dates when such rules shall…”
United States v. Sine, 461 F. Supp. 565 (D.S.C. 1978). “The court reflects that the constitutional right to bail is lost after conviction, that there is no constitutional right to appeal, but there is a statutory right to appeal; since there is no constitutional right to appeal, there is no constitutional right to be free pending an…”
In Re Grand Jury Proceedings, 616 F.3d 1186 (10th Cir. 2010). “From 1948 to 1988, 18 U.S.C. § 3772 authorized the Supreme Court to prescribe “rules of practice and procedure.”
Doherty v. United States, 404 U.S. 28 (1971). “904 , now codified as amended, 18 U. S. C. § 3772 . These early rules did not address the issue of indigents' representation on appeal of convictions.”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the
Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and
treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.