COUSSENS ET AL.

v.

CARPENTERS DISTRICT COUNCIL OF DETROIT, UNITED BROTHERHOOD OF CARPENTERS & JOINERS OF AMERICA, AFL-CIO, ET AL.; SHELBY COUNTY SHERIFF'S DEPARTMENT V. RUIZ; KAVANAGH V. MCSHEA; GREEN V. OKLAHOMA; RONSON V. COMMISSIONER OF CORRECTION OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK; SHANNON V. DEROBERTIS, WARDEN, ET AL.; SMITH V. UNION MUTUAL LIFE INSURANCE CO.; SCHREIBER V. GENCORP, INC., ET AL.; GABRIEL V. INTERSTATE COMMERCE COMMISSION ET AL.; CLEAR-VIEW CABLE T. V., INC. V. TOWN OF NARROWS; COLLINS V. FRANCIS, WARDEN; OWENS V. ILLINOIS; OWENS V. ILLINOIS; HATCH V. MASON ET AL.

Citator

Cited By

• United States ex rel. Miguel A. Espinoza v. J.W. Fairman, 813 F.2d 117 (7th Cir. 1987)
  …oke the right to counsel at their arraignments are invoking both their Sixth and Fifth Amendment rights. See Collins v. Francis, 728 F. 2d 1322 (11th Cir.) (per curiam), cert. denied, 469 U.S. 963, 105 S.Ct. 361, 83 L.Ed.2d 297 (1984), reh’g denied, 469 U.S. 1143, 105 S.Ct. 826, 83 L.Ed.2d [*124] 818 (1985); Jordan v. Watkins, 681 F. 2d 1067 (5th Cir.), reh’g denied sub. nom. Jordan v. Thigpen, 688 F. 2d 395 (5th Cir.1982); Blasingame v. Estelle, 604 F. 2d 893 (5th Cir.1979). In each case, the court held tha…
• Witt v. Wainwright, 470 U.S. 1039 (U.S. 1985)
  …J., dissenting). Nor will he be the first person whose execution this Court has sanctioned “while the constitutionality of his sentence is in doubt.” See, e. g., Stephens v. Kemp, 469 U. S. 1098, 1099 (1984) (Brennan, J., dissenting); Green v. Zant, 469 U. S. 1143, 1144 (1985) (Brennan, J., dissenting). The responsibility to decide profoundly difficult and divisive legal questions is not [*1046] a comfortable one. All too often, judges seek to avoid this responsibility by hiding behind unexplained and unexpla…
• Gov't of the Virgin Islands v. Hercules, 875 F.2d 414 (3d Cir. 1989)
  …e Green v. Zant, 738 F. 2d [*419] 1529 (11th Cir.1984) (“[t]he object of a poll of the jury is to ascertain that the verdict agreed upon in the jury room is still the unanimous verdict of the jury”) (citation omitted) (emphasis added), cert. denied, 469 U.S. 1143, 105 S.Ct. 827, 83 L.Ed.2d 819 (1985). Under the facts contained in the record before us, this “jury poll” cannot possibly reveal the effects of any undue coercion — a task which it is, in part, designed to accomplish. An inevitable conclusion to b…