TaiLexi AI U.S. Case Law

Brandt v. United States

Brandt v. United States Brack v. United States Brandt v. United States Gebhardt v. United States Hoven v. United States Mrugowsky v. United States Sievers v. United States Fischer v. United States Genzken v. United States Handloser v. United States Rose v. United States Schroeder v. United States Becker-Freyseng v. United States and Beigelboeck v. United States

Brandt v. United States, 333 U.S. 836 (1948)
Download
Format
Include

Star paging (*137) is kept for pin cites.

Court
Supreme Court of the United States
Decided
February 16, 1948
Docket
Nos. 286; No. 287; No. 288; No. 289; No. 290; No. 291; No. 292; No. 293; No. 294; No. 295; No. 296; No. 297; No. 298; No. 299
Judges
Applications, Are, Black, Consideration, Hearing, Jurisdiction, Murphy, Question, Set, Should, That, Took
Citations
333 U.S. 836
Cited by 15

Opinion of the Court

Text extracted by OCR from a scanned original; check the original for exact wording.

Motions for leave to file petitions for writs of habeas corpus and prohibition denied.

Mr. Justice Black, Mr. Justice Murphy and Mr. Justice Rutledge are of the opinion that the petitions should be set for hearing on the question of the jurisdiction of this Court. Mr. Justice Jackson took no part in the consideration or decision of these applications.

How later courts describe this case

No later court has written an explanatory parenthetical about this case yet.

Cited by 15 cases

View all citing references →
1948: 91949: 41950: 12011: 119482026peak 1948 · 9

Relies on it most ⓘ

  1. Koki Hirota v. General of the Army MacArthur Kenji Dohihara v335 U.S. 876 (1948)
  2. Johnson v. Eisentrager339 U.S. 763 (1950)
  3. Everett v. Truman334 U.S. 824 (1948)
  4. United States v. Hamdan801 F. Supp. 2d 1247 (M.C. 2011)
  5. In re Eckstein335 U.S. 851 (1948)
  6. In re Heim335 U.S. 856 (1948)

Most recent

  1. United States v. Hamdan801 F. Supp. 2d 1247 (M.C. 2011)
  2. Johnson v. Eisentrager339 U.S. 763 (1950)
  3. In re Felsch337 U.S. 953 (1949)
  4. In re Steimle337 U.S. 913 (1949)
  5. In re Alois Muhlbauer336 U.S. 964 (1949)
  6. In re Dammann336 U.S. 922 (1949)

Citing references are not a citator: they show that a later opinion cites this case, not whether it followed, distinguished, or overruled it. Check negative history before relying on this case.

Authorities cited 0

No citations to other opinions in this database were found.

Keyboard shortcuts

/Focus the search box
j kNext / previous result
EnterOpen the selected result
xAdd / remove the selected result from the download list
n pNext / previous search term in a case
cCopy the citation of the current case
+ −Larger / smaller reading text
?Show this list