Marshall v. Lonberger
Supreme Court of the United States
1Opinion of the CourtJustice Rehnquist
The issue here is whether the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment requires the vacation of respondent’s Ohio murder conviction. The United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit, which granted respondent’s petition for a writ of habeas corpus, Lonberger v. Jago, 635 F. 2d 1189 (1980), and Lonberger v. Jago, 651 F. 2d 447 (1981), held that it did. The Court of Appeals held that respondent’s plea of guilty to a previous Illinois felony charge, offered and admitted into evidence at his Ohio murder trial, was invalid under Boykin v. Alabama, 395 U. S. 238 (1969). It went on to…
2Cases cited18 opinions
- Boykin v. AlabamaSupreme Court of the United States · 1969
- Bruton v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1968
- Townsend v. SainSupreme Court of the United States · 1963
- Sandstrom v. MontanaSupreme Court of the United States · 1979
- Snyder v. MassachusettsSupreme Court of the United States · 1934
13 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by1,532 opinions
- Estelle v. McGuireSupreme Court of the United States · 1991
- Wainwright v. WittSupreme Court of the United States · 1985
- Purkett v. ElemSupreme Court of the United States · 1995
- Richardson v. MarshSupreme Court of the United States · 1987
- Miller v. FentonSupreme Court of the United States · 1985
1,527 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.