TRAXLER
v.
MISSISSIPPI
TRAXLER
MISSISSIPPI
348 U.S. 922
Supreme Court of the United States (1955)
Positive Treatment
Cited by 3 cases
Per_curiam
Appeal from and petition for writ of certiorari to the Supreme Court of Mississippi.
Per Curiam:
The appeal is dismissed for want of jurisdiction. 28 U. S. C. § 1257 (2). The petition for writ of certiorari is denied.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
United States v. Lippman, 492 F.2d 314 (6th Cir. 1974)…ce. In so holding, we note that we have previously found a similar state to be valid. Anderson v. United States, 215 F. 2d 84 (6th Cir. 1954), cert. denied sub nom., Lewis v. United States, 348 U.S. 888, 75 S.Ct. 208, 99 L.Ed. 698, rehearing denied, 348 U.S. 922, 75 S.Ct. 291, 99 L.Ed. 723.1 Appellant next contends that the indictment failed to set out in sufficient detail all the elements of the offense. It is asserted that neither of the two counts sufficiently identified the victim of the alleged endeav…
-
Rudin v. United States, 254 F.2d 45 (6th Cir. 1958)…tal or conviction. Hagner v. United States, 285 U.S. 427, 431, 52 S.Ct. 417, 76 L.Ed. 861; Anderson v. United States, 6 Cir., 215 F. 2d 84, 86-87, certiorari denied, Lewis v. United States, 348 U.S. 888, 75 S.Ct. 208, 99 L.Ed. 698, rehearing denied, 348 U.S. 922, 75 S.Ct. 291, 99 L.Ed. 723. As stated by the court in United States v. Debrow, 346 U.S. 374, 378, 74 S.Ct. 113, 98 L.Ed. 92, it is inconceivable to us how the defendant could possibly be misled, ás to the offense with which he stood charged. Readi…
-
Stout v. Dallman, 492 F.2d 992 (6th Cir. 1974)…n understanding and practices, although impossible standards of specificity are not required. North American Van Lines, Inc. v. United States, 243 F. 2d 693, 697 (6th Cir., 1957); Anderson v. United States, 215 F. 2d 84, 90 (6th Cir.), cert. denied, 348 U.S. 922, 75 S.Ct. 291, 99 L.Ed. 723 (1954). We find nothing vague in a statute which makes it a crime to steal from the person of another while armed with a dangerous weapon. The term “dangerous weapon” is not so vague as to render the statute unconstituti…