NORVELL, ATTORNEY GENERAL OF NEW MEXICO

v.

APODACA; AND BROWN ET AL. V. APODACA ET AL.

Citator

Cited By

• United States v. Dionisio, 410 U.S. 1 (U.S. 1973)
  …ious effect on fourth amendment rights as the practice condemned in Davis.” Id., at 281. In view of a clear conflict between this decision and one in the Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit,5 we granted the Government’s petition for certiorari. 406 U. S. 956. I The Court of Appeals correctly rejected the contention that the compelled production of the voice exemplars would violate the Fifth Amendment. It has long been held that the compelled display of identifiable physical characteristics infringes n…
• United States v. Mara, 410 U.S. 19 (U.S. 1973)
  …y process is not being abused. . . . [T]he Government’s affidavit must also show why satisfactory handwriting and printing exemplars cannot be obtained from other sources without grand jury compulsion.” 454 F. 2d, at 584^585. We granted certiorari, 406 U. S. 956, to consider this case with United States v. Dionisio, No. 71-229, ante, p. 1. We have held today in Dionisio, that a grand jury subpoena is not a “seizure” within the meaning of the Fourth Amendment and, further, that that Amendment is not violate…
• Gulf States Utils. Co. v. Fed. Power Comm'n, 411 U.S. 747 (U.S. 1973)
  …United States, 387 U. S. 485 (1967).4 [*755] Inasmuch as the decision of the Court of Appeals raised issues of potential and recurring importance with respect to the authorization of securities by the Federal Power Commission, we granted certiorari. 406 U. S. 956 (1972). The Commission took the position that the [*756] Court of Appeals was in error, but nevertheless opposed the grant. II The mandate that § 204 of the Federal Power Act, 16 U. S. C. § 824c, imposes upon the Commission is a broad and impressi…