Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

476 F.2d 66

Docket No. 72-1905.

Bradford v. Johnson

Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals

Argued Feb. 8, 1973.

Decided March 28, 1973.

Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals · decided 1973-03-28

2 counsel of record

Key passage — most relied on by later courts

“knowing use of coerced testimony obtained by torture, threats and abuse of a witness”

quoted by 1 later decision, including State v. Baum

Relies on Bradford v. Johnson

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Opinion by (per_curiam) · Decided 1973-03-28

How this case has been cited

Cited by 26 later decisions — most recently June 2009 · most notably State v. Wolery (1976), Clanton v. Cooper (1997)

12 federal appellate · 1 district · 7 state decisions

1201973198019902000decided

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 →

¶1Stewart H. Freeman, Asst. Sol. Gen., for respondent-appellant; Frank J. Kelley, Atty. Gen., Robert A. Derengoski, Sol. Gen., Lansing, Mich., on brief.

¶2David R. Hood, Detroit, Mich., Court-appointed, for petitioner-appellee.

¶3Before EDWARDS and McCREE, Circuit Judges, and YOUNG,* District Judge.

¶5PER CURIAM.

¶6This appeal from the granting of a writ of habeas corpus presents the question whether a person convicted by a state’s knowing use of coerced testimony obtained by torture, threats and abuse of a witness is in custody in violation of his Constitutional right to due process of law. We answer this question in the affirmative and affirm the judgment of the District Court for the reasons stated in its opinion reported at 354 F.Supp. 1331.

¶7Affirmed.

/476/f2d/66 · .json · Public domain