Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®

Digital Commons Network

Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®

PDF

University of Richmond

1982

Law

Whalen v. United States

Articles 1 - 2 of 2

Full-Text Articles in Entire DC Network

Post-Whalen Double Jeopardy In Virginia, Ronald J. Bacigal Jan 1982

Post-Whalen Double Jeopardy In Virginia, Ronald J. Bacigal

Law Faculty Publications

The constitutional prohibition against double jeopardy serves three distinct purposes: (1) prohibition of a second prosecution after acquittal; (2) prohibition of a second prosecution after conviction; and (3) prohibition of multiple punishments for the same offense. This article addresses the problem of defining "the same offense," and specifically focuses on the application of the Blockburger test in light of Whalen v. United States.


Double Jeopardy And The Virginia Supreme Court: Three Approaches To Multiple Punishment, Jane S. Glenn Jan 1982

Double Jeopardy And The Virginia Supreme Court: Three Approaches To Multiple Punishment, Jane S. Glenn

University of Richmond Law Review

The double jeopardy clause of the fifth amendment of the United States Constitution affords three primary protections. First, the clause protects against a second prosecution for the same offense after acquittal. Secondly, it protects against a second prosecution for the same offense after conviction. Thirdly, the clause prohibits the imposition of multiple punishment for a single offense. Although the double jeopardy principle has roots in antiquity, it may be one of our least understood constitutional protections. This comment will focus on the third protection of double jeopardy as it has been developed by the United States Supreme Court and recently …