SENK

v.

PENNSYLVANIA

Citator

Cited By

• Cascade Natural Gas Corp. v. EL Paso Natural GAS Co., 386 U.S. 129 (U.S. 1967)
  …74 F. Supp. 242 (D. C. W. D. Ark.) (24 (a) (3) intervention denied municipalities served by railroad involved in reorganization proceedings to which . State was a' party);"Buftenoorlh v. Dempsey, 229 F.. Supp. 754, 798-799 (£)-. C. Conn.); aff’d, 378 U. S. 562 (intervention under 24 (a) (3) denied overrepresented towns in reapportionment suit brought)against state authorities). Intervention in this Court was allowed in United States v. St. Louis Terminal, 236 U. S. 194, but there the “intervenors” were i…
• United States ex rel. Edwin Gockley v. Myers, 411 F.2d 216 (3d Cir. 1969)
  …held that Gockley had not waived his right to have determined the issue of the voluntariness of his statements. See 276 F.Supp. at 751-753. The principle of Jackson has been applied retroactively, as the court below stated. See Senk v. Pennsylvania, 378 U.S. 562, 84 S.Ct. 1928, 12 L.Ed.2d 1039 (1964) and Oister v. Pennsylvania, 378 U.S. 568, 84 S.Ct. 1926, 12 L.Ed.2d 1038 (1964). The court below stated that: “The rule enunciated in Jackson is that before a statement may be admitted in evidence there must…
• United States v. Brierley, 471 F.2d 657 (3d Cir. 1973)
  …t was vacated by the United States Supreme Court and the case was remanded for a hearing pursuant to Jackson v. Denno, 378 U.S. 368, 84 S.Ct. 1774, 12 L.Ed.2d 908 (1964), on the admissibility of Senk’s extrajudicial statements. Senk v. Pennsylvania, 378 U.S. 562, 84 S.Ct. 1928, 12 L.Ed.2d 1039 (1964) (per curiam). [*658] The Pennsylvania Supreme Court then remanded to the trial court with directions to hold a hearing to determine whether Senk’s extrajudicial statements, admitted at his trial, were voluntary…