Opinion · Supreme Court of the United States

Burlington Northern Railroad Co. v. Bell Et Al.

482 U.S. 919

Type
Opinion
Court
Supreme Court of the United States
Jurisdiction
Federal
Date
1987-06-08
Topic
general

How later courts describe this case

  • showing in support of request for funds for a forensic expert was insufficient
  • defendant is harmed only if he uses a peremptory strike to remove venireperson and thereafter suffers detriment from a loss of the strike
  • the definition of "under term of imprisonment" in § 13A-5-49 (1) encompasses persons on probation or parole
  • "statements in the record such as `upon their oaths' are sufficient to show that a jury was sworn"
  • ‘[a] minute entry is deemed to be a sufficient showing that the oath was administered’
  • where defendant made no ‘showing of the need for a forensic expert’ to examine fingerprints on a beer can, he ‘was not unconstitutionally denied the assistance of experts’

Citator

UpLaw has not yet analyzed Burlington Northern Railroad Co. v. Bell Et Al.. The absence of a flag is not a finding that it is good law.

Cited by
121 opinions

Ct. App. Okla. Certiorari denied.