HABLE

v.

LEE, CORRECTIONS COMMISSIONER, ET AL.

Citator

Cited By (28 total)

• Drew v. United States, 331 F.2d 85 (D.C. Cir. 1964)
  …are Boyd v. United States, 142 U.S. 450 at 458, 12 S.Ct. 292 at 295, 35 L.Ed. 1077 (1892); Martin v. United States, supra (concurring opinion); Bracey v. United States, supra; Payne v. United States, 111 U.S.App.D.C. 94, 294 F. 2d 723, cert. denied, 368 U.S. 883, 82 S.Ct. 131, 7 L.Ed.2d 83 (1961); United States v. Magee, supra; Boyer v. United States, supra. . A few examples will illustrate the point. “Q. [by Government counsel] Now, can you tell the ladies and gentlemen of the jury and His Honor what thi…
• Jurek v. Estelle, 623 F.2d 929 (5th Cir. 1980)
  …of the police, because no one can say that there was a causal connection between the failure to take Jurek before the magistrate that morning and his confessions that night. See Smith v. State, 171 Tex.Cr.R. 313, 350 S.W. 2d 344 (1961), cert. denied 368 U.S. 883, 82 S.Ct. 126, 7 L.Ed.2d 83. From the moment District Attorney Cheatham entered the picture, there are no more openings for fault finding. He had held that office 17 years at the time of this offense and obviously knew his business. He had been awa…
• Smith v. United States, 324 F.2d 879 (D.C. Cir. 1963)
  …ng1 case controlled as to Bowden. In essence these appeals present the familiar “fruit of the poisonous tree” argument but in a novel form not unlike that presented in Payne v. United States, 111 U.S.App.D.C. 94, 294 F. 2d 723 (1961), cert. denied, 368 U.S. 883, 82 S.Ct. 131, 7 L.Ed.2d 83. The crucial evidence against Smith was the testimony of Holman, the eyewitness to the crime. Courts have gone a long way in suppressing evidence but no case as yet has held that a jury should be denied the testimony of…