Malloy v. Hogan - Significance, Right To Remain Silent, Transactional Immunity
Patrick J. Hogan, Sheriff of Hartford County, Connecticut
That imprisonment for contempt of court, following refusal to answer questions in state court about a previous conviction, violated his Fifth Amendment privilege against self-incrimination.
Chief Lawyer for Appellant
Chief Lawyer for Appellee
John D. LaBelle
Justices for the Court
Hugo Lafayette Black, William J. Brennan, Jr. (writing for the Court), William O. Douglas, Arthur Goldberg, Earl Warren
Tom C. Clark, John Marshall Harlan II, Potter Stewart, Byron R. White
Date of Decision
18 June 1964
The Supreme Court found that the Fifth Amendment applies at the state level and reversed Malloy's conviction.
- Twining v. State of New Jersey, 211 U.S. 78 (1904).
- Gitlow v. New York, 268 U.S. 652 (1925).
- Palko v. Connecticut, 302 U.S. 319 (1937).
- Cantwell v. Connecticut, 310 U.S. 296 (1940).
- Adamson v. California, 332 U.S. 46 (1947).
- Mapp v. Ohio, 367 U.S. 643 (1961).
- Gideon v. Wainwright, 372 U.S. 335 (1963).
- Levy, Leonard W. Origins of the Fifth Amendment: The Right Against Self-Incrimination. New York: Oxford University Press, 1968.
- Meltzer, Milton. The Right to Remain Silent. New York: Harcourt Brace Jovanovich, 1972.
- Mykkeltvedt, Roald Y. The Nationalization of the Bill of Rights: Fourteenth Amendment Due Process and the Procedural Rights. Port Washington, NY: Associated Faculty Press, 1983.
- Maryland v. Wirtz - Significance, Minimum Wage And Overtime, Interstate Commerce And Labor Peace, Disrupting The Fiscal Policy Of The States
- Loving v. Commonwealth of Virginia - Significance, Interracial Marriage
- Malloy v. Hogan - Significance
- Malloy v. Hogan - Right To Remain Silent
- Malloy v. Hogan - Transactional Immunity
- Other Free Encyclopedias