MAY

v.

INDIANA

Citator

Cited By (64 total)

• Wells v. State, 402 So. 2d 402 (Fla. 1981)
  …ps. See United States v. York, 578 F. 2d 1036 (5th Cir.), cert. denied, 439 U.S. 1005, 99 S.Ct. 619, 58 L.Ed.2d 682 (1978) (no distinction between visitor and inmate); United States v. Hearst, 563 F. 2d 1331, 1345 n.11 (9th Cir. 1977), cert. denied, 435 U.S. 1000, 98 S.Ct. 1656, 56 L.Ed.2d 90 (1978) (no distinction between pretrial detainee and inmate); Gettleman v. Werner, 377 F.Supp. 445, 451 (W.D.Pa.1974) (no distinction between prison guard and inmate). . Many cases exhibit a reluctance to abandon a rea…
• United States v. Orange Jell Beechum, 582 F.2d 898 (5th Cir. 1978)
  …tegrity of others because they claim the privilege, is totally inapposite to the defendant himself. . Our conclusion is in accord with the recent holding of the Ninth Circuit in United States v. Hearst, 563 F. 2d 1331 (9th Cir. 1977), cert. denied, 435 U.S. 1000, 98 S.Ct. 1656, 56 L.Ed.2d 90 (1978). There the court held that because the noted defendant, Patty Hearst, took the stand, she waived her fifth amendment privilege and that it was therefore not improper for the Government to ask questions eliciting…
• United States v. Henry, 447 U.S. 264 (U.S. 1980)
  …re not elicited by governmental action. Thus, the Sixth Amendment is not violated when a passive listening device collects, but does not induce, incriminating comments. See United States v. Hearst, 563 F. 2d 1331, 1347-1348 (CA9 1977), cert, denied, 435 U. S. 1000 (1978). Similarly, the mere presence of a jailhouse informant who had been instructed to overhear conversations and to engage a criminal defendant in some conversations would not necessarily be unconstitutional. In such a case, the question would be…

  ← 1 / 4 →