United States v. Rhodes
District Court, S.D. Alabama
Joseph E. Rhodes and John J. Rhodes were indicted for perjury in violation of Penal Code (Act March 4, 1909, c. 321, 35 Stat. 1111 [U. S. Comp. St. Supp. 1911, p. 1625]) § 125. On demurrer to indictment.
1Opinion of the Court
TOULMIN, District Judge.
[1] 1. The law is well settled that the constitutional provision that no man shall be compelled to be a witness against himself enables a person, under ordinary circumstances, to refuse not only to give, oral testimony, but to produce his books and pa-' *519pers, on the ground that they would tend to incriminate him. Boyd v. U. S., 116 U. S. 616, 6 Sup. Ct. 524, 29 L. Ed. 746. And it is held that a bankrupt, as well as any other person, is entitled to the protection of such constitutional provision. In re Kanter & Cohen (D. C.) 9 Am. Bankr. Rep. 104, 117 Fed. 356; In re…
2Cases cited5 opinions
- Boyd v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1886
- In re KanterDistrict Court, S.D. New York · 1902
- In re HarrisDistrict Court, S.D. New York · 1908
- In re ChamberlainDistrict Court, N.D. New York · 1910
- In re Dow's EstateDistrict Court, S.D. Iowa · 1900
3Cited by7 opinions
- Woolley v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1938
- United States v. LautDistrict Court, S.D. New York · 1955
- Clark v. StateSupreme Court of Delaware · 1970
- United States v. CoyleDistrict Court, N.D. New York · 1916
- Temple v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma · 1918
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.