Cases pin-citing Smalis · Go Syfert

Cases pin-citing Smalis

Smalis v. Pennsylvania  ·  1986  ·  27 pinpoint citations from 7 cases, 9 distinct passages.


Deedy v. Suzuki  ·  2018-08-10  ·  D. Hawaii  ·  3 pin-cites  ·  pin 106 L. Ed. 2d at 116
"the category of acquittals includes 'judgment[s] ... by the court that the evidence is insufficient to convict"
Marcus Robinson v. Edward Thomas  ·  2017-04-27  ·  Fourth Circuit  ·  3 pin-cites  ·  pin 106 L. Ed. 2d at 116
“[W]hen a trial court enters such a judgment [of acquittal], the Double Jeopardy Clause bars an appeal by the prosecution[.]”
Farrell v. State  ·  2001-06-22  ·  Court of Appeals of Maryland  ·  3 pin-cites  ·  pin 106 L. Ed. 2d at 116
“The status of the trial court’s judgment as an acquittal is not affected by the Commonwealth’s allegation that the court” ... “ ‘erroneously] interpreted] ... [a] governing legal principle’ ”
United States v. George Lynch and Christopher Moscinski  ·  1998-12-14  ·  Second Circuit  ·  12 pin-cites  ·  pin 106 L. Ed. 2d at 116
"The status of the trial court's judgment as an acquittal is not affected by the ... allegation that the court erred in deciding what degree of recklessness was ... required."
State v. Ledbetter  ·  1997-04-15  ·  Supreme Court of Connecticut  ·  pin 90 L. Ed. 2d at 116
“When a successful postacquittal appeal by the prosecution would lead to proceedings that violate the Double Jeopardy Clause, the appeal itself has no proper purpose. Allowing such an appeal would frustrate the interest of the accused in having an end to the proceedings against him.”
People v. Torres  ·  1996-06-25  ·  Michigan Supreme Court  ·  3 pin-cites  ·  pin 106 L. Ed. 2d at 116
"the Double Jeopardy Clause bars an appeal by the prosecution not only when it might result in a second trial, but also if reversal would translate into further proceedings devoted to the resolution of factual issues going to the elements of the offense charged"
State v. Webb  ·  1996-04-25  ·  Court of Appeals of Arizona  ·  2 pin-cites  ·  pin 106 S. Ct. at 140
“subjecting the defendant to post-acquittal factfinding proceedings going to guilt or innocence violates the Double Jeopardy Clause”