dual sovereignty doctrine (Tennessee) · Go Syfert
← Tennessee issues

dual sovereignty doctrine in Tennessee

8 Tennessee opinions name it 2 courts 2000–2006 0 in the last five years

The cases below were cited by Tennessee 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.

Followed or applied (5)

CaseFollowedCited
Lavon v. Stategreen
tenn · 1979 · cited in 7 Tennessee opinions naming this issue, 2001–2006
2 sentences

2006Furthermore, “any modification or abandonment of the dual sovereignty doctrine must be accomplished through legislative action.” Thomas, 158 S.W.3d at 391 (citing Lavon v. State, 586 S.W.2d 112, 115 (Tenn. 1979)).

2003The dual sovereignty doctrine is based upon the rationale that “the state and federal governments are distinct sovereignties, and thus the punishment of a single act by each is not double jeopardy.” Lavon, 586 S.W.2d at 113-14 .

77
Bartkus v. Illinoisgreen
scotus · 1959 · cited in 5 Tennessee opinions naming this issue, 2001–2006
2 sentences

2006Our supreme court has specifically upheld and adhered to the doctrine of dual sovereignty, reasoning as follows: “There is no question but that such a procedure does not subject the defendant to double jeopardy insofar as the guaranty of due process in the 14th amendment of the federal constitution is concerned.” State v. Thomas, 158 S.W.3d 361, 391 (Tenn. 2005) (citing Bartkus v. Illinois , 359 U.S. 121 (1959)).

2005Bartkus v. Illinois, 359 U.S. 121 , 79 S.Ct. 676 , 3 L.Ed.2d 684 (1959).

15
United States v. Wheelerred
scotus · 1978 · cited in 2 Tennessee opinions naming this issue, 2000–2003
2 sentences

2003On the other hand, the doctrine of dual sovereignty provides that “a federal prosecution does not bar a subsequent state prosecution of the same person for the same acts, and a state prosecution does not bar a federal one.” United States v. Wheeler, 435 U.S. 313, 317 , 98 S. Ct. 1079, 1082-83 (1978); see Lavon v. State, 586 S.W.2d 112 (Tenn. 1979) (upholding and adhering to the dual sovereignty doctrine).

2003On the other hand, the doctrine of dual sovereignty provides that “a federal prosecution does not bar a subsequent state prosecution of the same person for the same acts, and a state prosecution does not bar a federal one.” United States v. Wheeler, 435 U.S. 313, 317 , 98 S. Ct. 1079, 1082-83 (1978); see Lavon v. State, 586 S.W.2d 112 (Tenn. 1979) (upholding and adhering to the dual sovereignty doctrine).

12
State v. Thomasgreen
tenn · 2005 · cited in 1 Tennessee opinions naming this issue, 2006–2006
2 sentences

2006Our supreme court has specifically upheld and adhered to the doctrine of dual sovereignty, reasoning as follows: “There is no question but that such a procedure does not subject the defendant to double jeopardy insofar as the guaranty of due process in the 14th amendment of the federal constitution is concerned.” State v. Thomas, 158 S.W.3d 361, 391 (Tenn. 2005) (citing Bartkus v. Illinois , 359 U.S. 121 (1959)).

2006Furthermore, “any modification or abandonment of the dual sovereignty doctrine must be accomplished through legislative action.” Thomas, 158 S.W.3d at 391 (citing Lavon v. State, 586 S.W.2d 112, 115 (Tenn. 1979)).

11
State v. Michael Holmesgreen
tenncrimapp · 1998 · cited in 1 Tennessee opinions naming this issue, 2002–2002
1 sentence

2002See State v. Holmes, 995 S.W.2d 135, 139 (Tenn. Crim.

11

Distinguished, questioned or overruled (0)

CaseNegativeCited
No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Tennessee. Read the followed side critically anyway.

Also cited on this issue (1)

CaseCitedYears
State v. Carpenter green
tenncrimapp · 2001
1 sentence

2003This court recently faced a similar dilemma in State v. Carpenter, 69 S.W.3d 568 (Tenn. Crim.

12003–2003

Statutes the citing opinions construe

TN § Tenn. Code Ann. § 39-13-204 (4) TN § Tenn. Code Ann. § 39-11-402 (3) TN § Tenn. Code Ann. § 39-13-202 (3)

Counted by distinct opinions that both name this issue and are annotated to the section; sections every opinion cites regardless of issue are not filtered here, so read the counts against the total above.

Where else courts name it

TX 21 (1988–2025) MI 14 (1975–2018) OH 11 (1971–2024) GA 11 (1987–2020) MD 10 (1984–2017) CO 10 (1977–2026) NJ 9 (1977–2022) TN 8 (2000–2006) PA 7 (1980–2021) FL 6 (1981–2015) WI 6 (1993–2021) CA 6 (1976–2020) AL 5 (1983–2010) MS 5 (1993–2014) UT 5 (1987–2026) NY 5 (1984–2014) NM 4 (1977–2023) WA 4 (1983–2021) KY 3 (1999–2003) MN 3 (2012–2014) CT 3 (1976–1999) MO 3 (1974–1997) NV 3 (1989–2016) IA 3 (1998–2001) OK 2 (2013–2020) RI 2 (2004–2007) ME 2 (2015–2017) AR 2 (1999–2020) IL 2 (1986–1989)

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.

← Caselaw search · G Cite Topics · Brief Check