In re Cohen
New York Court of Appeals
1DissentFtjld, J.
In order to appreciate the force of today’s decision, it must be borne in mind that we are concerned not with the necessarily vague contours of the Due Process Clause of the Federal Constitution, but with the specific provision of the Constitution of this State that no person shall be compelled to be a witness against himself (art. I, § 6). Eecent Supreme Court decisions (Lerner v. Casey, 357 U. S. 468; Beilan v. Board of Educ., 357 U. S. 399; and Nelson v. Los Angeles County, 362 U. S. 1), whatever their bearing on the present problem, are, therefore, not dispositive of this case. In other…
2Cases cited11 opinions
- People Ex Rel. Karlin v. CulkinNew York Court of Appeals · 1928
- Matter of RoussNew York Court of Appeals · 1917
- Beilan v. Board of Public Ed., School Dist. of PhiladelphiaSupreme Court of the United States · 1958
- Lerner v. CaseySupreme Court of the United States · 1958
- Nelson v. County of Los AngelesSupreme Court of the United States · 1960
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.