Legal Opinion

United States v. Fore

District Court, S.D. California

Decided March 10, 1941No. 5558-SDPublishedCited by 5 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

NETERER, District Judge.

The defendant charged with murder in the first degree, was without counsel; he is a poor person, and unable to employ attorneys; on being arraigned he requested the court to assign counsel for him; counsel was appointed, and a plea of not guilty was entered; at the time counsel for the defendant stated that insanity would be urged, and presumed the California statute of procedure in such cases would not apply. The court stated the conformity statute has no application and directed that insanity may be presented, at trial, as a defense on the plea of not guilty. 38…

2Cases cited12 opinions

  1. Ex Parte SchollenbergerSupreme Court of the United States · 1878
  2. In re the Release or Relinquishment of the Right of Dower of MartinNew Jersey Court of Chancery · 1916
  3. In re SimonCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1924
  4. Frank Adam Electric Co. v. WitmanCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1915
  5. United States v. KinneyDistrict Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · 1920

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

3Cited by5 opinions

  1. Robert Girardier and Susan L. Luzkow v. Webster CollegeCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1977
  2. State of Oregon v. Blount, Sr.Oregon Supreme Court · 1953
  3. Telephone Credit Union v. FetelaSupreme Court of Rhode Island · 1990
  4. Robert Girardier and Susan L. Luzkow v. Webster CollegeCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1977
  5. State of Oregon v. Blount, Sr.Oregon Supreme Court · 1953

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

Powered by the Exa API