Legal Opinion

United States v. Bell

District Court, S.D. California

Decided February 13, 1943No. 15759PublishedCited by 33 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

YANKWICH, District Judge (after stating the facts as above).

Offenses in which persons who profess heterodox doctrines are involved present problems which either do not exist in ordinary prosecutions or, if they do exist, are not pressed for solution. This for the reason that once we enter the realm of opinion, our American tradition of liberalism makes many persons and groups who do not condone the acts of the particular defendants, or do not share their ideas or the norms of their philosophy, interest themselves in their fate. They do this in pursuit of our ideal of free expression and to…

2Cases cited58 opinions

  1. Carroll v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1925
  2. Weeks v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1914
  3. Olmstead v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1928
  4. Nardone v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1939
  5. Agnello v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1925

53 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by33 opinions

  1. Aday v. Superior CourtCalifornia Supreme Court · 1961
  2. Brinegar v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma · 1953
  3. Bell v. HoodDistrict Court, S.D. California · 1947
  4. The United States of America v. Farris WalkerCourt of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 1957
  5. United States v. EbelingCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1944

28 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API