Already have an account? Sign in instead.
You stay signed in for 30 days on this browser.
Continue with Google Continue with MicrosoftNo account yet? Create a free one.
We sent a six-digit code.
It expires in ten minutes, works once, and only in this browser. Five wrong tries void it. Send another code.
Your account is live and the Cloudflare checks are off for this browser.
5 Pennsylvania opinions name it 2 courts 2011–2023 2 in the last five years
The cases below were cited by Pennsylvania courts in a sentence that names this issue. Sides come from how each citing opinion treated the case (Syfertize flag on that citation), so a case can appear on both: that is where the law is contested. A red or yellow chip is the case's own overall treatment.
| Case | Followed | Cited |
|---|---|---|
United States v. Renato Torresgreen1 sentence2023The majority ignores that jeopardy never attached because Redanauer was simply “never subjected to the risk of being convicted” at his preliminary hearing, Commonwealth v. Hunter, 674 A.2d 306 , 307–08 (Pa. Super. 1996), and because “[y]ou can’t have double jeopardy without a former jeopardy,” United States v. Torres, 28 F.3d 1463, 1465 (7th Cir. 1994), and “double jeopardy” would not bar further prosecution on docket 7444. | 1 | 1 |
Liciaga v. Court of Common Pleasgreen1 sentence2023Absent a finding of a prima facie case (or an unambiguous waiver of a preliminary hearing under Rule of Criminal Procedure 541), “the defendant is not exposed to a finding of responsibility for the alleged errant conduct and jeopardy does not attach.” Liciaga v. Ct. of Common Pleas of Lehigh Cty., 566 A.2d 246, 248 (Pa. 1989) (opinion announcing judgment of court) (citation omitted); see also Commonwealth v. Cordoba, 902 A.2d 1280 , 1284–85 (Pa. Super. 2006). | 1 | 1 |
Commonwealth v. Cordobagreen1 sentence2023Absent a finding of a prima facie case (or an unambiguous waiver of a preliminary hearing under Rule of Criminal Procedure 541), “the defendant is not exposed to a finding of responsibility for the alleged errant conduct and jeopardy does not attach.” Liciaga v. Ct. of Common Pleas of Lehigh Cty., 566 A.2d 246, 248 (Pa. 1989) (opinion announcing judgment of court) (citation omitted); see also Commonwealth v. Cordoba, 902 A.2d 1280 , 1284–85 (Pa. Super. 2006). | 1 | 1 |
Miller v. Alabamagreen1 sentence2017See Miller, 567 U.S. at 481 . | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Pennsylvania. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Commonwealth v. Hunter
green
1 sentence2023The majority ignores that jeopardy never attached because Redanauer was simply “never subjected to the risk of being convicted” at his preliminary hearing, Commonwealth v. Hunter, 674 A.2d 306 , 307–08 (Pa. Super. 1996), and because “[y]ou can’t have double jeopardy without a former jeopardy,” United States v. Torres, 28 F.3d 1463, 1465 (7th Cir. 1994), and “double jeopardy” would not bar further prosecution on docket 7444. | 1 | 2023–2023 |
McLaughlin v. Monaghan
green
2 sentences2023McLaughlin v. Monaghan, 290 Pa. 74 , 138 A. 79 (1927); Starling v. West Erie Ave. 2023McLaughlin v. Monaghan, 290 Pa. 74 , 138 A. 79 (1927); Starling v. West Erie Ave. | 1 | 2023–2023 |
Commonwealth v. Hill
green
1 sentence2015Hill, 16 A.3d at 494 . | 1 | 2015–2015 |
Dietrich v. Dietrich
green
1 sentence2011Id. | 1 | 2011–2011 |
Opinions by the citing court's state. A doctrine retained in one state and abandoned in another shows up here as a year span that stalls.