|
|
| |
Access State and Federal Case Law, plus U.S. Supreme Court cases —
for free!
Click on any of the case links below to view the full text of that case —
for free — through lexisONE®, a legal research and news service from LexisNexis®. Login is required — registration is free!
|
| |
Federal Courts -
U. S. Supreme Court - January - November, 1932
|
| |
Blockburger v. United States, No. 374,
SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES, January 4, 1932, Decided
View this case - free
|
Overview: Defendant was charged and convicted of selling drugs without their original packaging and without a written order, which were violations of 26 U.S.C.S. ?? 692 and 696. Defendant contended that he had committed only one offense and that only one penalty could be imposed. Both of defendant's convictions and his consecutive sentencing were upheld on appeal. Defendant sought further judicial review from the United States Supreme Court, which granted his petition for certiorari. The Court reviewed the record and affirmed the consecutive sentences that were imposed, concluding that defendant had committed two separate offenses because each provision of the Harrison Narcotic Act required proof of an additional fact that the other did not. Selling the proscribed drugs without their original packaging was not the same crime as selling them without a written order. Where two provisions of a statute contained different elements, prosecution and punishment under both of them did not result in double jeopardy.
|
|
| |
Powell v. Ala., Nos. 98, 99, 100,
SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES, November 7, 1932, Decided
View this case - free
|
Overview: Defendants pled not guilty in state court to charges of rape after an incident that took place on a freight train. Although it was recited that defendants were represented by counsel upon arraignment, no counsel had been employed until the day of the trial. Prior to that time, the trial judge had appointed all members of the bar for the limited purpose of arraigning defendants. Defendants were ultimately found guilty and sentenced to death. The trial court overruled defendants' motions for new trials, and their convictions were affirmed by the state supreme court. The court reversed the convictions and remanded, holding that defendants were denied their right to counsel in violation of the Fourteenth Amendment. The court held that defendants did not have the aid of counsel in any real sense from the time of their arraignment until the beginning of trial. The court noted that defendants' illiteracy, youth, and the circumstances of public hostility made the necessity of counsel so imperative that the trial court's failure to make an effective appointment of counsel and the failure to give defendants a reasonable opportunity to secure counsel was a clear denial of due process.
|
|
| |
Back to Top |
| |
|
Worldwide
Feedback
Feedback