Legal Opinion
United States v. Harold Silvern
Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit
Decided August 7, 1973No. 72-1133PublishedCited by 127 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
SPRECHER, Circuit Judge.
This case has been reheard en banc in an attempt to establish greater certainty in district courts in this Circuit, and to conserve judicial energy by possibly avoiding appeals and retrials, in regard to the giving of the so-called Allen or “dynamite” charge as a supplemental instruction to a deadlocked jury.
The Allen instruction was approved by the Supreme Court in Allen v. United States, 164 U.S. 492, 501-02, 17 S.Ct. 154, 157, 41 L.Ed. 528 (1896) 1 and although no court has held that the' instruction itself is unconstitutional, it has had a stormy career.2
From 1963…
2Cases cited8 opinions
- Allen v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1896
- United States v. John Fioravanti, Nicholas Panaccione, and Angelo Pepe, Nicholas PanaccioneCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1969
- United States v. Anthony C. ThomasCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 1971
- United States v. Darwin Clark BaileyCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1972
- United States v. Roscoe Brown, Also Known as Sam, Also Known as Samuel MorrisCourt of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 1969
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by127 opinions
- Lowenfield v. PhelpsSupreme Court of the United States · 1988
- United States v. William ReyCourt of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · 1987
- State v. HowardOhio Supreme Court · 1989
- United States v. SblendorioCourt of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 1987
- United States v. Tony SparkmanCourt of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 2016
122 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.