This HTML5 document contains 133 embedded RDF statements represented using HTML+Microdata notation.

The embedded RDF content will be recognized by any processor of HTML5 Microdata.

Namespace Prefixes

PrefixIRI
dctermshttp://purl.org/dc/terms/
yago-reshttp://yago-knowledge.org/resource/
n15http://cdn.loc.gov/service/ll/usrep/usrep169/usrep169218/
dbohttp://dbpedia.org/ontology/
n22http://dbpedia.org/resource/File:
foafhttp://xmlns.com/foaf/0.1/
n8https://global.dbpedia.org/id/
umbel-rchttp://umbel.org/umbel/rc/
yagohttp://dbpedia.org/class/yago/
dbthttp://dbpedia.org/resource/Template:
rdfshttp://www.w3.org/2000/01/rdf-schema#
freebasehttp://rdf.freebase.com/ns/
n19http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Special:FilePath/
rdfhttp://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#
owlhttp://www.w3.org/2002/07/owl#
wikipedia-enhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/
dbchttp://dbpedia.org/resource/Category:
dbphttp://dbpedia.org/property/
provhttp://www.w3.org/ns/prov#
xsdhhttp://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema#
wikidatahttp://www.wikidata.org/entity/
dbrhttp://dbpedia.org/resource/
n18https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/169/218/

Statements

Subject Item
dbr:Barrett_v._United_States
rdf:type
yago:Case107308889 yago:Event100029378 yago:Abstraction100002137 dbo:LegalCase yago:Happening107283608 yago:PsychologicalFeature100023100 yago:WikicatUnitedStatesSupremeCourtCases dbo:UnitOfWork dbo:SupremeCourtOfTheUnitedStatesCase umbel-rc:Event yago:YagoPermanentlyLocatedEntity owl:Thing wikidata:Q2334719 dbo:Case
rdfs:label
Barrett v. United States
rdfs:comment
Barrett v. United States, 169 U.S. 218 (1898), was a case in which the Supreme Court of the United States held that South Carolina had never effectively been subdivided into separate judicial districts. Therefore, it was held, a criminal defendant allegedly tried in one district for a crime committed in the other had in fact been permissibly been tried in a separate division of a single district.
foaf:name
Barrett v. United States
foaf:depiction
n19:South_Carolina_-_Barrett_map.jpg
dcterms:subject
dbc:1898_in_United_States_case_law dbc:United_States_Sixth_Amendment_case_law dbc:United_States_Supreme_Court_cases dbc:United_States_Constitution_Article_Three_case_law dbc:1898_in_South_Carolina dbc:United_States_Constitution_Article_Three_venue_case_law dbc:Legal_history_of_South_Carolina dbc:United_States_Supreme_Court_cases_of_the_Fuller_Court
dbo:wikiPageID
21994352
dbo:wikiPageRevisionID
1038509549
dbo:wikiPageWikiLink
dbr:Abbeville_County,_South_Carolina dbr:Boston dbr:Sixth_Amendment_to_the_United_States_Constitution dbr:United_States_circuit_court dbr:Chester_County,_South_Carolina dbr:Letterhead dbc:1898_in_United_States_case_law dbr:Mail_order dbr:L._Ed. dbc:United_States_Supreme_Court_cases dbc:United_States_Sixth_Amendment_case_law dbr:Washington,_D.C. dbr:Conspiracy_(crime) dbr:United_States_Marshals_Service dbr:William_H._Brawley dbr:Laurens_County,_South_Carolina dbr:Lancaster_County,_South_Carolina dbr:Augusta,_Georgia dbr:Safe dbr:Judiciary_Act_of_1789 dbr:Spartanburg_County,_South_Carolina dbr:Organ_(music) dbc:United_States_Constitution_Article_Three_case_law dbr:Piano dbr:United_States_Constitution dbr:United_States_federal_judge dbr:New_Jersey dbr:Spartanburg,_South_Carolina dbr:Richmond,_Virginia dbr:Chief_Justice_of_the_United_States dbr:Atlanta dbr:Pendleton_District,_South_Carolina dbr:York_County,_South_Carolina dbr:United_States_district_court dbr:Greenville_County,_South_Carolina dbr:New_York_City dbr:Post_office dbr:Chicago dbr:Desk dbr:Newberry_County,_South_Carolina dbr:Melville_Fuller dbc:United_States_Constitution_Article_Three_venue_case_law dbr:Matheson_v._United_States dbc:1898_in_South_Carolina dbr:Jury dbr:Edgefield_County,_South_Carolina dbr:Fairfield_County,_South_Carolina dbr:Savannah,_Georgia dbc:Legal_history_of_South_Carolina dbr:Article_Three_of_the_United_States_Constitution dbr:Clerk_of_the_court dbr:South_Carolina dbr:Defendant dbr:United_States_District_Court_for_the_District_of_South_Carolina dbr:Baltimore dbr:United_States_Congress dbr:Federal_Reporter dbr:Charlotte,_North_Carolina dbr:Encyclopedia dbr:Vicinage_Clause n22:South_Carolina_-_Barrett_map.JPG dbr:United_States_Attorney dbr:Columbia,_South_Carolina dbr:Alaska dbr:Pennsylvania dbr:Union_County,_South_Carolina dbr:Supreme_Court_of_the_United_States dbc:United_States_Supreme_Court_cases_of_the_Fuller_Court
dbo:wikiPageExternalLink
n18: n15:usrep169218.pdf
owl:sameAs
n8:4VqrF freebase:m.05p57x5 wikidata:Q4863453 yago-res:Barrett_v._United_States
dbp:subsequent
none
dbp:wikiPageUsesTemplate
dbt:Infobox_SCOTUS_case dbt:Caselaw_source dbt:USArticleIII dbt:Wikisource-inline dbt:Ussc dbt:USDistCourts dbt:Reflist
dbo:thumbnail
n19:South_Carolina_-_Barrett_map.jpg?width=300
dbp:joinmajority
unanimous
dbp:lawsapplied
U.S. Const., Art. III, ยง 2, cl. 3. and Amend. VI.
dbp:parallelcitations
18
dbp:prior
United States v. Barrett et al., 65 F. 62
dbp:uspage
218
dbp:usvol
169
dbp:arguedate
0001-01-21
dbp:argueyear
1898
dbp:case
Barrett v. United States,
dbp:decidedate
0001-02-21
dbp:decideyear
1898
dbp:fullname
Barrett v. United States
dbp:holding
South Carolina had not been divided into separate federal judicial districts.
dbp:justia
n18:
dbp:litigants
Barrett v. United States
dbp:majority
dbr:Melville_Fuller
dbp:loc
n15:usrep169218.pdf
dbo:abstract
Barrett v. United States, 169 U.S. 218 (1898), was a case in which the Supreme Court of the United States held that South Carolina had never effectively been subdivided into separate judicial districts. Therefore, it was held, a criminal defendant allegedly tried in one district for a crime committed in the other had in fact been permissibly been tried in a separate division of a single district.
prov:wasDerivedFrom
wikipedia-en:Barrett_v._United_States?oldid=1038509549&ns=0
dbo:wikiPageLength
9956
foaf:isPrimaryTopicOf
wikipedia-en:Barrett_v._United_States