HARRIS

v.

UNITED STATES

Citator

Cited By

• Harris v. United States, 382 U.S. 162 (U.S. 1965)
  …itted to call witnesses. The District Court denied the motion and thereupon adjudged petitioner guilty of criminal contempt, imposing a sentence of one year’s imprisonment.1 The Court of Appeals [*164] affirmed, 334 F. 2d 460. We granted certiorari, 379 U. S. 944. Rule 42 (a) is entitled “Summary Disposition” and reads as follows: “A criminal contempt may be punished summarily if the judge certifies that he saw or heard the conduct constituting the contempt and that it was committed in the actual presence…
• Jenkins v. United States, 380 U.S. 445 (U.S. 1965)
  …e to agree upon a verdict “on both counts because of insufficient evidence.” The judge thereupon recalled the jury to the courtroom and in the course of his response stated that “You have got to reach a decision in this case.” We granted certiorari, 379 U. S. 944, to consider whether in its context and under all the circumstances of this case the statement was coercive. The Solicitor General in his brief in this Court stated: “Of course, if this Court should conclude that the judge’s statement had the coerc…
• United States v. Midland-Ross Corp., 381 U.S. 54 (U.S. 1965)
  …ourt for the Northern District of Ohio, 214 F. Supp. 631, and in the Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit, 335 F. 2d 561. Because this treatment as capital gains conflicts with the result reached by other courts of appeals,2 we granted certiorari. 379 U. S. 944. We reverse. The more favorable capital gains treatment applied only to gain on “the sale or exchange of a capital asset.” § 117 (a)(4). Although original issue discount becomes property when the obligation falls due or is liquidated prior to matu…