Law Commons^™

Contemplating The Successive Prosecution Phenomenon In The Federal System, Elizabeth T. Lear

Elizabeth T Lear

Constitutional scholars have long debated the relative merits of a conduct-based compulsory joinder rule. The dialogue has centered on the meaning of the “same offence” language of the Double Jeopardy Clause, concentrating specifically on whether it includes the factual circumstances giving rise to criminal liability or applies only to the statutory offenses charged. However, the Supreme Court, in United States v. Dixon, abandoned as “unworkable” a limited conduct-based approach it had fashioned just three years before in Grady v. Corbin.

This Article does not assess the frequency with which federal authorities prosecute joinable offenses separately. While such information ultimately is …

People V. Boone, Diane Somberg

Touro Law Review

No abstract provided.

Double Jeopardy, The Federal Sentencing Guidelines, And The Subsequent-Prosecution Dilemma, Elizabeth T. Lear

Elizabeth T Lear

The choice to embrace a real-offense regime probably constitutes the single most controversial decision made by the Federal Sentencing Commission in drafting the Federal Sentencing Guidelines ("Guidelines"). Real-offense sentencing bases punishment on a defendant's actual conduct as opposed to the offense of conviction. The Guidelines sweep a variety of factors into the sentencing inquiry, including criminal offenses for which no conviction has been obtained. Under the Guidelines, therefore, prosecutorial charging decisions and even verdicts of acquittal after jury trial may have little impact at sentencing.

Long before the adoption of the Guidelines, courts bent on rationalizing the real-offense regime devised …

Family Court Of New York, Nassau County - In Re S.S., Steven Fox

Touro Law Review

No abstract provided.

Court Of Appeals Of New York - In Re Suarez, Malaika Makembe

Touro Law Review

No abstract provided.

Prosecution Appeals Of Court-Ordered Midtrial Acquittals: Permissible Under The Double Jeopardy Clause?, David S. Rudstein

Catholic University Law Review

No abstract provided.

Rob Once, Serve Twice?: Punishment Under Both The Federal Bank Robbery Act And The Hobbs Act Violates The Double Jeopardy Clause, Jamie Zimmerman

Nevada Law Journal

No abstract provided.

Criminal Procedure: Allowing The Prosecution A "Second Bite At The Apple" In Non-Capital Sentencing: Monge V. California, Eva Maria Floyd

Oklahoma Law Review

No abstract provided.

Double Jeopardy

Touro Law Review

No abstract provided.

Contemplating The Successive Prosecution Phenomenon In The Federal System, Elizabeth T. Lear

UF Law Faculty Publications

Constitutional scholars have long debated the relative merits of a conduct-based compulsory joinder rule. The dialogue has centered on the meaning of the “same offence” language of the Double Jeopardy Clause, concentrating specifically on whether it includes the factual circumstances giving rise to criminal liability or applies only to the statutory offenses charged. However, the Supreme Court, in United States v. Dixon, abandoned as “unworkable” a limited conduct-based approach it had fashioned just three years before in Grady v. Corbin.

This Article does not assess the frequency with which federal authorities prosecute joinable offenses separately. While such information ultimately is …

Double Jeopardy, The Federal Sentencing Guidelines, And The Subsequent-Prosecution Dilemma, Elizabeth T. Lear

UF Law Faculty Publications

The choice to embrace a real-offense regime probably constitutes the single most controversial decision made by the Federal Sentencing Commission in drafting the Federal Sentencing Guidelines ("Guidelines"). Real-offense sentencing bases punishment on a defendant's actual conduct as opposed to the offense of conviction. The Guidelines sweep a variety of factors into the sentencing inquiry, including criminal offenses for which no conviction has been obtained. Under the Guidelines, therefore, prosecutorial charging decisions and even verdicts of acquittal after jury trial may have little impact at sentencing.

Long before the adoption of the Guidelines, courts bent on rationalizing the real-offense regime devised …