Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

218 U.S. 572

31 S. Ct. 134

Docket No. 515.

Griffith v. Connecticut

Supreme Court of the United States

Submitted November 28, 1910.

Decided December 12, 1910.

Supreme Court of the United States · decided 1910-12-12

<p>ERROR TO THE SUPREME COURT OF ERRORS OF THE STATE OF CONNECTICUT.</p> <p>The facts are stated in the opinion.</p>

2 counsel of record

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Affirmed · 7–0 · Decided 1910-12-12

How this case has been cited

Cited by 13 later decisions (1 by the Supreme Court) — most recently November 1946

6 federal appellate · 4 district · 1 state decisions

501910192019301940decided

Later decisions citing this case, by decade. The current decade is in progress, and our corpus holds fewer opinions from the most recent years, so the latest bars are undercounted — not a real decline.

View the full empirical analysis of this case →

¶1ERROR TO THE SUPREME COURT OF ERRORS OF THE STATE OF CONNECTICUT.

¶2Motion to dismiss or affirm.

¶3Decided on authority of Griffith v. Connecticut, ante, p. 563.

¶4The facts are stated in the opinion.

¶5Mr. I. Henry Harris for plaintiff in error.

¶6Mr. Hugh, M. Alcorn for defendant in error.

¶7Mr. Justice White

¶8delivered the opinion of the court.

¶9The parties to this record are the stale as in. No. 514, just decided, ante, p. 563, and the questions involved are the same, the prosecution being for similar offenses against the Connecticut act of 1907. Both cases were tried together. Upon the conviction in this, however, the trial court imposed the penalty of imprisonment. The two cases were disposed of by the Supreme Court of Errors in one opinion. As the decision in No. 514 is necessarily controlling, it follows that the judgment -of the Supreme Court of Errors of Connecticut must be and it is

¶10Affirmed.

/218/us/572 · .json · Public domain