Supreme Court of the United States, 1983

Davis v. Goodson

Supreme Court of the United States · Decided January 17, 1983 · Stevens, Marshall

459 U.S. 1154; 103 S. Ct. 798; 74 L. Ed. 2d 1002; 51 U.S.L.W. 3530; 1983 U.S. LEXIS 3148 (United States Reports)

Cases that cite this one

40 later published cases cite this decision. The 25 that cite it most often are listed here.

In re Krisle (United States Bankruptcy Court, D. South Dakota 1985)
David Whitney Chamberlain v. Richard F. Celeste (6th Cir. 1984)
Fitzgerald v. State (Okla. Crim. App. 1998)
Slaughter v. State (Okla. Crim. App. 1997)
Salazar v. State (Okla. Crim. App. 1996)
Smith v. State (Okla. Crim. App. 1996)
Smallwood v. State (Okla. Crim. App. 1995)
Valdez v. State (Okla. Crim. App. 1995)
Bryson v. State (Okla. Crim. App. 1994)
McGregor v. State (Okla. Crim. App. 1994)
Van White v. State (Okla. Crim. App. 1988)
Fisher v. State (Okla. Crim. App. 1987)
Fisher v. State (Okla. Crim. App. 1987)
Thompson v. State (Okla. Crim. App. 1986)
VanWoundenberg v. State (Okla. Crim. App. 1986)
Jones v. Gibson (10th Cir. 2000)
Hernandez v. State (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1995)
Medlock v. State (Okla. Crim. App. 1994)
Trice v. State (Okla. Crim. App. 1993)
Vento v. State (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1993)
Evans v. State (Md. 1991)
Meeks v. Dugger (Fla. 1991)
State v. Whitehead (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1988)
Cartwright v. Maynard (10th Cir. 1987)
Castro v. State (Okla. Crim. App. 1987)

This list shows which later cases cite this one. It does not say how they treated it, and no review of that has been done. Not a substitute for Shepard’s or KeyCite — verify before relying.

Opinion

459 U.S. 1154

103 S.Ct. 798

74 L.Ed.2d 1002

James E. DAVIS
v.
John W. GOODSON

No. 82-490

Supreme Court of the United States

January 17, 1983

On petition for writ of certiorari to the Supreme Court of Arkansas.

The petition for writ of certiorari is denied.

Justice STEVENS, concurring in the denial of the petition for writ of certiorari.

Because the petition for a writ of certiorari does not affirmatively show that a federal question was presented to or decided by the Supreme Court of Arkansas, I believe the Court correctly denies the writ.

Justice MARSHALL, dissenting.

Petitioner was summarily held in contempt for advising his client that he had a privilege not to submit to a breathalyzer test. In citing petitioner for contempt, the judge made no finding that the advice was given in bad faith. Given the absence of such a finding, I would grant certiorari to decide whether petitioner's conviction and sentence for contempt are constitutionally infirm in light of this Court's decision in Maness v. Meyers, 419 U.S. 449, 95 S.Ct. 584, 42 L.Ed.2d 574 (1975), where we held that "an advocate is not subject to the penalty of contempt for advising his client, in good faith, to assert the Fifth Amendment privilege against self-incrimination in any proceeding embracing the power to compel testimony." Id., at 468, 95 S.Ct., at 596. See also id., at 472, 95 S.Ct., at 598 (Stewart, J., concurring in the result); In re Watts, 190 U.S. 1, 29, 23 S.Ct. 718, 725, 47 L.Ed. 933 (1903) ("if an attorney acts in good faith and in the honest belief that his advice is well founded and in the just interests of his client, he cannot be held liable for error in judgment").

Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.