|
|
Brown v. United States, 356 U.S. 148 (1958)
Contents:
Show Summary
Hide Summary
General SummaryThis case is from a collection containing the full text of over 16,000 Supreme Court cases from 1793 to the present. The body of Supreme Court decisions are, effectively, the final interpretation of the Constitution. Only an amendment to the Constitution can permanently overturn an interpretation and this has happened only four times in American history.
Brown v. United States, 356 U.S. 148 (1958)
Brown v. United States No. 43 Argued April 4, 1957 Restored to the calendar for reargument June 10, 1957 Reargued October 22, 1957 Decided March 31, 1958 356 U.S. 148
CERTIORARI TO THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE SIXTH CIRCUIT
Syllabus
In the Government’s civil suit in a Federal District Court for petitioner’s denaturalization on the ground that she had fraudulently procured citizenship by swearing falsely that she was not, and had not been, a member of or affiliated with the Communist Party, she voluntarily took the stand and testified at length in her own defense. Thereafter, during cross-examination, she refused, on grounds of self-incrimination, to answer questions which were relevant to her testimony on direct examination. The District Court ruled that she had waived her privilege by testifying in her own defense and ordered her to answer, but she persisted in her refusal to do so. For this, she was summarily adjudged guilty of criminal contempt and sentenced to imprisonment.
Held: the conviction is sustained. Pp. 149-157.
(a) There can be no doubt that stubborn disobedience of the duty to answer relevant inquiries in a judicial proceeding brings into force the power of the federal courts to punish for contempt. Ex parte Hudgings, 249 U.S. 378, and In re Michael, 326 U.S. 224, distinguished. Pp. 153-154.
(b) By taking the stand and testifying in her own behalf, petitioner waived the right to invoke on cross-examination her privilege against self-incrimination regarding matters made relevant by her direct examination. Pp. 154-156.
(c) The record does not fairly support petitioner’s claim that the District Court found a waiver simply in the act of taking the stand and misled her as to the actual legal question involved. Pp. 156-157.
234 F.2d 140, affirmed.
Contents:
Chicago: U.S. Supreme Court, "Syllabus," Brown v. United States, 356 U.S. 148 (1958) in 356 U.S. 148 356 U.S. 149. Original Sources, accessed November 25, 2024, http://originalsources.com/Document.aspx?DocID=QF5E7KT3WDZM35R.
MLA: U.S. Supreme Court. "Syllabus." Brown v. United States, 356 U.S. 148 (1958), in 356 U.S. 148, page 356 U.S. 149. Original Sources. 25 Nov. 2024. http://originalsources.com/Document.aspx?DocID=QF5E7KT3WDZM35R.
Harvard: U.S. Supreme Court, 'Syllabus' in Brown v. United States, 356 U.S. 148 (1958). cited in 1958, 356 U.S. 148, pp.356 U.S. 149. Original Sources, retrieved 25 November 2024, from http://originalsources.com/Document.aspx?DocID=QF5E7KT3WDZM35R.
|