Case Citator › Jackson v. Denno

Jackson v. Denno

Is it still good law? What later courts have actually done to this case.

Criticized by some courts
Court
Supreme Court of the United States
Citation
378 U.S. 368
Decided
Confirmed treatments
1
Flagged citations read
286 of 286
Citing cases (total)
6,013
Treatment dates
1965
Criticized by some courts
At least one reviewed court has criticized this case’s reasoning. No reviewed court has overruled it. Criticized: all 286 flagged citations have been read, and the confirmed treatment is listed below. Sims v. State sharply criticized Jackson while distinguishing Georgia's confession procedure.
More on how this was screened

The other opinions applied or distinguished Jackson as the governing rule for judicial determinations of voluntariness; nearby “overruled” language described Jackson's displacement of Stein and older local procedures or concerned other objections and appellate contentions.

Every treatment on this page is written from the citing opinion itself, with a verbatim quote, never copied from a commercial citator. A citation flagged by our screen but not shown here was read and found not to weaken this case.

6,013 later cases cite Jackson v. Denno; 286 of those citations sat close to treatment language and were flagged for reading, and all of them have been read. Citations that did not sit near treatment language were not flagged and were not read one by one, so a court that weakened this case without using any of that language would not appear here.

Relying on Jackson v. Denno?

This page shows what later courts did to it. Ask about your specific facts and see whether it still carries your argument, with citations you can check.

Treatments

Criticized

  • The Georgia Supreme Court criticized Jackson's separate-voluntariness-hearing rule as illogical, impracticable, and utterly unsound while construing it not to govern Georgia's procedure in the case.

    Sims v. State · Supreme Court of Georgia · filed

    Did we think that the Jackson case applied to this case we would unhesitatingly follow it, despite our firm, conviction that it is illogical, impracticable and utterly unsound.
    Read the full opinion on CourtListener →

Does this case still carry your argument?

Describe your facts. Ezel reads Jackson v. Denno and the cases that treated it, then tells you whether it still holds for your situation, with citations.

Opens in Ezel Pro.

  • Checks the law as it stands today, not only this page
  • Cites every source it relies on, so you can verify it
  • Chat, drafting and research in one workspace