Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Institution
-
- Touro University Jacob D. Fuchsberg Law Center (9)
- West Virginia University (4)
- William & Mary Law School (3)
- Maurer School of Law: Indiana University (2)
- Selected Works (2)
-
- Villanova University Charles Widger School of Law (2)
- SJ Quinney College of Law, University of Utah (1)
- Seattle University School of Law (1)
- University of Arkansas at Little Rock William H. Bowen School of Law (1)
- University of Cincinnati College of Law (1)
- University of Florida Levin College of Law (1)
- University of Georgia School of Law (1)
- University of Nevada, Las Vegas -- William S. Boyd School of Law (1)
- Publication Year
- Publication
-
- Touro Law Review (9)
- West Virginia Law Review (4)
- Indiana Law Journal (2)
- Villanova Law Review (2)
- William & Mary Law Review (2)
-
- Daniel A. Horwitz (1)
- Faculty Articles and Other Publications (1)
- Faculty Scholarship (1)
- John F. Stinneford (1)
- Nevada Supreme Court Summaries (1)
- Scholarly Works (1)
- Seattle University Law Review (1)
- UF Law Faculty Publications (1)
- Utah Law Faculty Scholarship (1)
- William & Mary Bill of Rights Journal (1)
- Publication Type
Articles 1 - 29 of 29
Full-Text Articles in Law
Kidnapping Reconsidered: Courts Merger Tests Inadequately Remedy The Inequities Which Developed From Kidnapping's Sensationalized And Racialized History, Samuel P. Newton
Kidnapping Reconsidered: Courts Merger Tests Inadequately Remedy The Inequities Which Developed From Kidnapping's Sensationalized And Racialized History, Samuel P. Newton
William & Mary Bill of Rights Journal
No abstract provided.
Gamble V. U.S.: Brief Of Amici Curiae Law Professors In Support Of Petitioner, Stuart Banner, Paul Cassell
Gamble V. U.S.: Brief Of Amici Curiae Law Professors In Support Of Petitioner, Stuart Banner, Paul Cassell
Utah Law Faculty Scholarship
In this case currently before the U.S. Supreme Court, petitioner Gamble's brief demonstrates that there was no dual sovereignty doctrine before the mid-19th century. At the Founding and for several decades thereafter, a prosecution by one sovereign was understood to bar a subsequent prosecution by all other sovereigns. Dual sovereignty is thus contrary to the original meaning of the Double Jeopardy Clause. Defendants today enjoy a weaker form of double jeopardy protection than they did when the Bill of Rights was ratified.
But that fact only raises three further questions. First why did the Court erroneously conclude in Bartkus v. …
Motion For Leave To File Amicus Curiae Brief And Brief For The National Association For Public Defense And Kentucky Association Of Criminal Defense Lawyers As Amici Curiae In Support Of Petitioner, Sneed V. Burress (U.S. March 24, 2017) (No. 16-8047)., Janet Moore
Faculty Articles and Other Publications
No abstract provided.
A Defendant's Fifth Amendment Right And Double Jeopardy In Contempt Cases, Saba Khan
A Defendant's Fifth Amendment Right And Double Jeopardy In Contempt Cases, Saba Khan
Touro Law Review
No abstract provided.
Dividing Crime, Multiplying Punishments, John F. Stinneford
Dividing Crime, Multiplying Punishments, John F. Stinneford
John F. Stinneford
When the government wants to impose exceptionally harsh punishment on a criminal defendant, one of the ways it accomplishes this goal is to divide the defendant’s single course of conduct into multiple offenses that give rise to multiple punishments. The Supreme Court has rendered the Double Jeopardy Clause, the Cruel and Unusual Punishments Clause, and the rule of lenity incapable of handling this problem by emptying them of substantive content and transforming them into mere instruments for effectuation of legislative will. This Article demonstrates that all three doctrines originally reflected a substantive legal preference for life and liberty, and a …
Dividing Crime, Multiplying Punishments, John F. Stinneford
Dividing Crime, Multiplying Punishments, John F. Stinneford
UF Law Faculty Publications
When the government wants to impose exceptionally harsh punishment on a criminal defendant, one of the ways it accomplishes this goal is to divide the defendant’s single course of conduct into multiple offenses that give rise to multiple punishments. The Supreme Court has rendered the Double Jeopardy Clause, the Cruel and Unusual Punishments Clause, and the rule of lenity incapable of handling this problem by emptying them of substantive content and transforming them into mere instruments for effectuation of legislative will.
This Article demonstrates that all three doctrines originally reflected a substantive legal preference for life and liberty, and a …
Brief Of Christopher L. Tuttle, U.S. Court Of Appeals For The Eleventh Circuit, Case No. 13-12310-A, Daniel A. Horwitz
Brief Of Christopher L. Tuttle, U.S. Court Of Appeals For The Eleventh Circuit, Case No. 13-12310-A, Daniel A. Horwitz
Daniel A. Horwitz
No abstract provided.
Double Jeopardy: A Resentencing Game, Deirdre Cicciaro
Double Jeopardy: A Resentencing Game, Deirdre Cicciaro
Touro Law Review
No abstract provided.
Appellate Division, Second Department, Smith V. Marrus, Elaine Yang
Appellate Division, Second Department, Smith V. Marrus, Elaine Yang
Touro Law Review
No abstract provided.
Summary Of Lachance V. State, 130 Nev. Adv. Op. 29, Brian Vasek
Summary Of Lachance V. State, 130 Nev. Adv. Op. 29, Brian Vasek
Nevada Supreme Court Summaries
The Court determined whether (1) the sufficiency of the evidence supported the defendant’s domestic battery by strangulation and domestic battery causing substantial bodily harm convictions; (2) the convictions and sentences for possession with intent to sell and simple possession based on possession of the same controlled substance violates the Double Jeopardy Clause; (3) the defendant received adequate notice of the State’s intent to seek habitual criminal status; and (4) the district court properly adjudicated the defendant as a habitual criminal.
A Deal Is A Deal: Plea Bargains And Double Jeopardy After Ohio V. Johnson, Philip Chinn
A Deal Is A Deal: Plea Bargains And Double Jeopardy After Ohio V. Johnson, Philip Chinn
Seattle University Law Review
The Double Jeopardy Clause provides that no person will “be subject for the same offence to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb.” On March 10, 2004, Pedro Cabrera made a statement that cost him fourteen years of his life: he proclaimed his innocence. The court accepted this plea and ordered a finding of guilty with a recommended sentence of six years. However, during an exchange that followed, Mr. Cabrera asserted that he was actually innocent but that he preferred “to take the time” instead of proceeding to trial. The judge then refused to accept Mr. Cabrera’s guilty …
I’Ll Take “Improper Declarations Of Mistrial” For $2,000.00: Applying The Protection Against Double Jeopardy - Robar V. Labuda, Daniel Fier
Touro Law Review
No abstract provided.
Developing A State Constitutional Law Strategy In New Mexico Criminal Prosecutions, J. Thomas Sullivan
Developing A State Constitutional Law Strategy In New Mexico Criminal Prosecutions, J. Thomas Sullivan
Faculty Scholarship
This article includes a review of the process by which the New Mexico courts have developed an independent state constitutional jurisprudence reflecting more expansive protections of individual rights than those afforded by the Federal Constitution, as interpreted in the decisions of the United States Supreme Court. It addresses the existing body of state constitutional law and suggests possibilities for further developments, including both the substantive aspects of state constitutional topics and the procedural requirements for asserting state constitutional protections as alternative sources for protection of individual rights. It documents how far New Mexico has come in developing a state constitutional …
Much Sound, Not Too Much Fury: The Supreme Court's Criminal Law Decisions During The 1997 Term, William E. Hellerstein
Much Sound, Not Too Much Fury: The Supreme Court's Criminal Law Decisions During The 1997 Term, William E. Hellerstein
Touro Law Review
No abstract provided.
When Guilt Should Be Irrelevant: Government Overreaching As A Bar To Reprosecution Under The Double Jeopardy Clause After Oregon V. Kennedy, James F. Ponsoldt
When Guilt Should Be Irrelevant: Government Overreaching As A Bar To Reprosecution Under The Double Jeopardy Clause After Oregon V. Kennedy, James F. Ponsoldt
Scholarly Works
This article examines the effect of Oregon v. Kennedy on the Burger Court's double jeopardy jurisprudence in cases where government misconduct has interfered with the integrity of a first trial. The article proposes the complete elimination of current distinctions between mistrial and appellate reversal cases for double jeopardy analysis, on the ground that those distinctions no longer have intellectual or practical support. Moreover, against the contention of the Court in Oregon v. Kennedy that any test for overreaching necessarily would be standardless, this article proposes the adoption of a "plain error" standard. Under this test, "plain" government error, engaged in …
An Application Of Double Jeopardy And Collateral Estoppel Principles To Successive Prison Disciplinary And Criminal Prosecutions, Joseph S. Colussi
An Application Of Double Jeopardy And Collateral Estoppel Principles To Successive Prison Disciplinary And Criminal Prosecutions, Joseph S. Colussi
Indiana Law Journal
No abstract provided.
Criminal Law, Various Editors
Constitutional Law - Double Jeopardy - State Prosecution Barred After Federal Prosecution For Same Offense - Burden On State To Show Substantially Different Interests From Those Of Initial Prosecuting Jurisdiction, Ronald J. Examitas
Villanova Law Review
No abstract provided.
Double Jeopardy In Juvenile Proceedings, David S. Rudstein
Double Jeopardy In Juvenile Proceedings, David S. Rudstein
William & Mary Law Review
No abstract provided.
Double Jeopardy And Dual Sovereignty: A Critical Analysis, Ray C. Stoner
Double Jeopardy And Dual Sovereignty: A Critical Analysis, Ray C. Stoner
William & Mary Law Review
No abstract provided.
Criminal Law--Multiple Offenses From A Single Act Not Constitution Double Jeopardy
Criminal Law--Multiple Offenses From A Single Act Not Constitution Double Jeopardy
West Virginia Law Review
No abstract provided.
Criminal Law--Double Jeopardy--Multiple Transgressions From A Single Act, Earl Moss Curry Jr.
Criminal Law--Double Jeopardy--Multiple Transgressions From A Single Act, Earl Moss Curry Jr.
West Virginia Law Review
No abstract provided.
Improper Discharge Of Jury Before Verdict As Double Jeopardy, C. L. C.
Improper Discharge Of Jury Before Verdict As Double Jeopardy, C. L. C.
West Virginia Law Review
No abstract provided.
Constitutional Law--State's Right To Criminal Appeal, C. A. P. Jr.
Constitutional Law--State's Right To Criminal Appeal, C. A. P. Jr.
West Virginia Law Review
No abstract provided.
Intoxicating Liquors-Constitutional Law-Criminal Law-Double Jeopardy
Intoxicating Liquors-Constitutional Law-Criminal Law-Double Jeopardy
Indiana Law Journal
No abstract provided.