Bartkus v. People of the State of Illinois, 39

CourtU.S. Supreme Court
Writing for the CourtPER CURIAM; BRENNAN
CitationBartkus v. People of the State of Illinois, 355 U.S. 281, 78 S.Ct. 336, 2 L.Ed.2d 270 (1958)
Decision Date06 January 1958
Docket NumberNo. 39,39
PartiesAlfonse BARTKUS, petitioner, v. PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF ILLINOIS

Mr. Walter T. Fisher, for petitioner.

Mr. William C. Wines, Asst. Atty. Gen. of Illinois (Messrs. Latham Castle, Atty. Gen., and Theodore G. Maheras, Asst. Atty. Gen., on the brief), for respondent.

See 356 U.S. 969, 78 S.Ct. 1004.

On writ of certiorari to the Supreme Court of Illinois.

PER CURIAM.

The judgment is affirmed by an equally divided Court.

Mr. Justice BRENNAN took no part in the consideration or decision of this case.

Get this document and AI-powered insights with a free trial of vLex and Vincent AI

Get Started for Free

Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex

Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex

Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex

Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex

Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex

Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex
4 cases
  • Bartkus v. People of State of Illinois
    • United States
    • U.S. Supreme Court
    • March 30, 1959
    ...1 L.Ed.2d 116; 352 U.S. 958, 77 S.Ct. 358. On January 6, 1958, the judgment below was affirmed by an equally divided Court. 355 U.S. 281, 78 S.Ct. 336, 2 L.Ed.2d 270. On May 26, 1958, the Court granted a petition for rehearing, vacated the judgment entered January 6, 1958, and restored the ......
  • New Richmond News v. City of New Richmond
    • United States
    • Wisconsin Supreme Court
    • December 18, 2015
    ... ... of appeals 875 N.W.2d 109 for their consideration." State v. Richard Knutson, Inc., 191 Wis.2d 395, 396–97, 528 ... 15.6, at 838–39 (10th ed.2013). The practice of the United States Supreme ... But in Bartkus v. Illinois, 355 U.S. 281 [78 S.Ct. 336, 2 L.Ed.2d 270], ... ...
  • United States v. Hoyland
    • United States
    • U.S. Court of Appeals — Seventh Circuit
    • March 30, 1959
    ...independent trials by different sovereignties." Even so, defendant argues: "However, there is a case Bartkus v. People of State of Illinois, 355 U.S. 281, 78 S.Ct. 336, 2 L.Ed.2d 270; Id., 356 U.S. 969, 78 S.Ct. 1004, 2 L.Ed.2d 1075 (via certiorari) presently before the United States Suprem......
  • Ladner v. United States
    • United States
    • U.S. Supreme Court
    • January 6, 1958
2 books & journal articles
  • INDEX OF CASES
    • United States
    • Briefing and Arguing Federal Appeals Chapter XIV
    • Invalid date
    ...W. Va.], affirmed 319 U. S. 624) 108 Barr v. Matteo (360 U. S. 564) 331 Bart v. United States (349 U. S. 219) 110 Bartkus v. Illinois (355 U. S. 281, rehearing granted 356 U. S. 969) 186, 200, 210, 332, 374 Baumgartner v. United States (322 U. S. 665) 44, 93, 289 Bayer; United States v. (33......
  • Rehearings in the Supreme Court of the United States.
    • United States
    • Briefing and Arguing Federal Appeals Chapter IX
    • Invalid date
    ...350 U. S. 985, following affirmance at 350 U. S. 956; Bartkus v. Illinois, rehearing granted, 356 U. S. 969, following affirmance at 355 U. S. 281; Ladner v. United States, rehearing granted, 356 U. S. 969, following affirmance at 355 U. S. 282; note 48, infra.[47] E.g., Giese v. Chamberlin......