Mallory v. United States
Significance, Supreme Court Formulates Mcnabb-mallory Rule, Omnibus Crime Control And Safe Street Acts Of 1968
Andrew R. Mallory
That being arrested without probable cause and held for a prolonged period without being formally charged invalidated his confession.
Chief Lawyer for Petitioner
William B. Bryant
Chief Lawyer for Respondent
Edward L. Barrett, Jr., Special Assistant to the U.S. Attorney General
Justices for the Court
Hugo Lafayette Black, William J. Brennan, Jr., Harold Burton, Tom C. Clark, William O. Douglas, Felix Frankfurter (writing for the Court), John Marshall Harlan II, Earl Warren, Charles Evans Whittaker
Date of Decision
24 June 1957
Mallory's confession was ruled inadmissible and his conviction reversed.
- McNabb v. United States, 318 U.S. 332 (1943).
- Miranda v. Arizona, 384 U.S. 436 (1966).
Legal Information Institute. http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/18/3501.html
- Garcia, Alfredo. The Sixth Amendment in Modern American Jurisprudence: A Critical Perspective. New York, NY: Greenwood Press, 1992.
- Grano, Joseph D. Confessions, Truth, and the Law. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press, 1993.
- Inbau, Fred E., John E. Reid, and Joseph P. Buckley. Criminal Interrogation and Confessions, 3rd ed. Baltimore, MD: Williams & Wilkins, 1986.
- Mapp v. Ohio - Significance, Court Applies Exclusionary Rule To States, The Exclusionary Rule, Further Readings
- Kent v. Dulles - Significance, Supreme Court Recognizes A New Fundamental Right: Foreign Travel, The Right To Travel
- Mallory v. United States - Significance
- Mallory v. United States - Supreme Court Formulates Mcnabb-mallory Rule
- Mallory v. United States - Omnibus Crime Control And Safe Street Acts Of 1968
- Other Free Encyclopedias