Display Mode
Dark
Dark
Light
Light
Theme Cover
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Search History
No search history
Copied to clipboard
StarredCase saved
Oh No!
Copied to clipboard
StarredCase saved
Oh No!
Media
Term
Opinion Writer
Direction
Field

United States v. O'grady

• 1874 • 89 U.S. 641 • Waite Court
United States v. O'Grady was a United States Supreme Court case that dealt with the issue of whether a person could be convicted of a crime if the act was not specifically prohibited by law. The case involved a man named O'Grady who was charged with the crime of "malicious mischief" for cutting down a tree on public land. The government argued that O'Grady should be convicted because the act of cutting down the tree was a violation of the public trust and was therefore a crime. The Supreme...Open Case
Score:
Copyright © 2026Etalia.ai All Rights Reserved
  • Blog
  • •
  • Privacy
  • •
  • Terms
1 results found
Become a Sponsor
Support Us
Feedback: We can do better!

Your feedback is extremely important to us and greatly appreciated.
Tell us what went wrong

Copied to clipboard
StarredCase saved
Oh No!
Chief Waite Court
Term: 1874
Docket: 177
89 U.S. 641
22 L. Ed. 772
1874 U.S. LEXIS 1290
Argued: Feb 03, 1875

United States v. O'grady

  • Pro
  • Pro
Go Pro!orto acess these features and extra content.

Opinion Summary
AI Abstract

United States v. O'Grady was a United States Supreme Court case that dealt with the issue of whether a person could be convicted of a crime if the act was not specifically prohibited by law. The case involved a man named O'Grady who was charged with the crime of "malicious mischief" for cutting down a tree on public land. The government argued that O'Grady should be convicted because the act of cutting down the tree was a violation of the public trust and was therefore a crime. The Supreme Court disagreed with the government's argument and held that O'Grady could not be convicted of a crime unless the act was specifically prohibited by law. The Court reasoned that the government could not punish someone for an act that was not specifically prohibited by law. The Court also noted that the government could not punish someone for an act that was not specifically prohibited by law even if the act was considered to be wrong or immoral. The Court's decision in United States v. O'Grady established the principle that a person cannot be convicted of a crime unless the act is specifically prohibited by law. This principle has been applied in many subsequent cases and is an important part of the American legal system.

Dissent Summary
AI Abstract

Justice Field delivered the dissenting opinion in United States v. O'Grady, arguing that the majority's decision was inconsistent with prior Supreme Court precedent and would lead to an unjust result. He argued that Congress had not intended for a person who committed a crime before 1866 to be subject to prosecution under the Revised Statutes of 1874, which were enacted after his alleged offense occurred. Furthermore, he noted that if such prosecutions were allowed it could have serious implications on individuals’ rights as they may be prosecuted for acts done years ago without any warning or knowledge of their potential criminal liability at the time they acted. Justice Field concluded by stating that allowing this type of prosecution would violate fundamental principles of justice and fairness and should therefore not be permitted by the court.

Opinion written by Justice NClifford
Decided: Feb 15, 1875
PDF viewer is not available.
Go Pro!orto acess these features and extra content.
Related Cases
AI Assist
Go Pro!orto acess these features and extra content.
PDF viewer is not available.
Oral Transcripts
Go Pro!orto acess these features and extra content.
Related Cases
Go Pro!orto acess these features and extra content.
Ask Etalia.ai
Go Pro!orto acess these features and extra content.
Audio of Oral Arguments
Free Trial!
Become a Sponsor

Support Us
Copyright © 2026Etalia.ai All Rights Reserved
  • Blog
  • •
  • Privacy
  • •
  • Terms