Frank v. Mangum
E934446
Frank v. Mangum is a 1915 U.S. Supreme Court decision addressing whether mob-dominated criminal trials violate due process under the Fourteenth Amendment.
All labels observed (1)
| Label | Occurrences |
|---|---|
| Frank v. Mangum canonical | 1 |
How this entity was disambiguated
This entity first appeared as the object of triple T11576367 — resolving that mention is where its identity was fixed. The disambiguator weighed these candidate entities and picked the highlighted one (or “None”, minting a new entity). This is how homonymy is resolved: the same surface form can point to different entities.
NED1
Entity disambiguation (via context triple)
gpt-5-mini-2025-08-07
Target entity: Frank v. Mangum Context triple: [United States Supreme Court cases of the White Court, hasNotableCase, Frank v. Mangum]
-
A.
Marsh v. Chambers
Marsh v. Chambers is a 1983 U.S. Supreme Court case that upheld the constitutionality of legislative prayer, finding that opening legislative sessions with a state-funded chaplain’s invocation did not violate the Establishment Clause.
-
B.
Miller v. Johnson
Miller v. Johnson is a 1995 U.S. Supreme Court case that further developed the doctrine on racial gerrymandering and the Equal Protection Clause in legislative redistricting.
-
C.
Ray v. Blair
Ray v. Blair is a 1952 U.S. Supreme Court case that upheld a state's authority to require presidential electors to pledge support for their party's nominees as a condition of appointment.
-
D.
McDonald v. Smith
McDonald v. Smith is a 1985 U.S. Supreme Court case that held the First Amendment’s Petition Clause does not grant absolute immunity from libel suits for statements made in petitions to government officials.
-
E.
Briggs v. Elliott
Briggs v. Elliott was a landmark federal court case from South Carolina challenging racial segregation in public schools, and it became one of the key cases consolidated into Brown v. Board of Education.
- F. None of above. chosen
- G. Unsure - the case is ambiguous/there is not enough information to decide.
NED2
Entity disambiguation (via description)
gpt-5-mini-2025-08-07
Target entity: Frank v. Mangum Target entity description: Frank v. Mangum is a 1915 U.S. Supreme Court decision addressing whether mob-dominated criminal trials violate due process under the Fourteenth Amendment.
-
A.
Marsh v. Chambers
Marsh v. Chambers is a 1983 U.S. Supreme Court case that upheld the constitutionality of legislative prayer, finding that opening legislative sessions with a state-funded chaplain’s invocation did not violate the Establishment Clause.
-
B.
Miller v. Johnson
Miller v. Johnson is a 1995 U.S. Supreme Court case that further developed the doctrine on racial gerrymandering and the Equal Protection Clause in legislative redistricting.
-
C.
Ray v. Blair
Ray v. Blair is a 1952 U.S. Supreme Court case that upheld a state's authority to require presidential electors to pledge support for their party's nominees as a condition of appointment.
-
D.
McDonald v. Smith
McDonald v. Smith is a 1985 U.S. Supreme Court case that held the First Amendment’s Petition Clause does not grant absolute immunity from libel suits for statements made in petitions to government officials.
-
E.
Briggs v. Elliott
Briggs v. Elliott was a landmark federal court case from South Carolina challenging racial segregation in public schools, and it became one of the key cases consolidated into Brown v. Board of Education.
- F. None of above. chosen
Statements (48)
| Predicate | Object |
|---|---|
| instanceOf |
Fourteenth Amendment case
ⓘ
United States Supreme Court case ⓘ criminal procedure case ⓘ |
| areaOfLaw |
constitutional law
ⓘ
criminal law ⓘ federal courts ⓘ habeas corpus ⓘ |
| citation | 237 U.S. 309 ⓘ |
| constitutionalProvision |
Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment
NERFINISHED
ⓘ
Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution NERFINISHED ⓘ |
| country |
United States of America
ⓘ
surface form:
United States
|
| court | Supreme Court of the United States ⓘ |
| decisionDate | 1915-04-19 ⓘ |
| decisionType | reported decision ⓘ |
| dissentingOpinionBy |
Justice Charles Evans Hughes
NERFINISHED
ⓘ
Justice Joseph R. Lamar NERFINISHED ⓘ Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes Jr. NERFINISHED ⓘ Justice Willis Van Devanter NERFINISHED ⓘ |
| fullCaseName | Leo M. Frank v. C. A. Mangum, Sheriff, et al. NERFINISHED ⓘ |
| holding |
A state criminal conviction obtained in a trial allegedly influenced by mob domination does not necessarily violate the Fourteenth Amendment if the state provides corrective judicial processes.
ⓘ
Federal courts on habeas corpus generally may not reexamine state court findings where the state has afforded corrective judicial process. ⓘ |
| involvedPerson |
Charles Evans Hughes
NERFINISHED
ⓘ
Joseph R. Lamar NERFINISHED ⓘ Leo Frank NERFINISHED ⓘ Mahlon Pitney NERFINISHED ⓘ Oliver Wendell Holmes Jr. NERFINISHED ⓘ Willis Van Devanter NERFINISHED ⓘ |
| jurisdiction | federal question jurisdiction ⓘ |
| language | English ⓘ |
| legalIssue |
due process under the Fourteenth Amendment
ⓘ
federal habeas corpus review of state convictions ⓘ mob domination of criminal trials ⓘ |
| majorityOpinionBy | Justice Mahlon Pitney NERFINISHED ⓘ |
| originatingCourt | Supreme Court of Georgia NERFINISHED ⓘ |
| pageInUnitedStatesReports | 309 ⓘ |
| petitioner | Leo M. Frank NERFINISHED ⓘ |
| proceduralPosture | appeal from denial of federal habeas corpus relief ⓘ |
| publication | United States Reports NERFINISHED ⓘ |
| relatedCase |
Brown v. Mississippi
NERFINISHED
ⓘ
Moore v. Dempsey NERFINISHED ⓘ Powell v. Alabama NERFINISHED ⓘ |
| respondent | C. A. Mangum NERFINISHED ⓘ |
| subjectMatter | state criminal conviction for murder ⓘ |
| subsequentTreatment | partially limited by Moore v. Dempsey, 261 U.S. 86 (1923) ⓘ |
| topic |
mob influence on judicial proceedings
ⓘ
scope of federal habeas review of state convictions ⓘ |
| volumeInUnitedStatesReports | 237 ⓘ |
| yearDecided | 1915 ⓘ |
How these facts were elicited
The pipeline generated the facts above by prompting gpt-5.1 with this entity's name + description and the instruction below.
Instruction
You are a knowledge base construction expert. Given a subject entity and a description of it, return factual statements that you know for the subject as a JSON list of dictionaries(triples), where keys must be "subject", "predicate" and "object". The number of facts may be very high, between 25 to 50 or more, for very popular subjects. For less popular subjects, the number of facts can be very low, like 5 or 10. # Requirements - If you don't know the subject at all, return an empty list. - If the subject is not a named entity, return an empty list. - Include at least one triple where predicate is "instanceOf". - Do not get too wordy. - Separate several objects into multiple triples with one object.
Input
Subject: Frank v. Mangum Description of subject: Frank v. Mangum is a 1915 U.S. Supreme Court decision addressing whether mob-dominated criminal trials violate due process under the Fourteenth Amendment.
Referenced by (1)
Full triples — surface form annotated when it differs from this entity's canonical label.