Benton Vs. Maryland.

Benton vs Maryland.

Type Court Judgment Court US Supreme Court Decided 1968

~1 min read

https://sooperkanoon.com/case/102146

For advocates & juniors · 7-day free trial

Brief this judgment before chambers

Stop skimming 50 pages - get an 18-section AI Brief on this case, ask scoped follow-ups, and find related precedents with Semantic Search. Full trial, no card required.

18-section brief - facts, issues, ratio, relief
Ask this case - answers cite the judgment
Semantic search - find precedents by meaning
Research drawer - sections, cites, related cases

Citation: sooperkanoon.com/102146
Court: US Supreme Court
Decided On: 1968
Case Number: 392 U.S. 925
Subject: Miscellaneous

Case Summary

AI-generated summary - not the official court judgment text.

Miscellaneous

Key legal issue: Miscellaneous

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

Benton

Respondent

Maryland.

Excerpt

benton v. maryland. - 392 u.s. 925 (1968) u.s. supreme court benton v. maryland. , 392 u.s. 925 (1968) 392 u.s. 925 john dalmer benton, petitioner, v. maryland. no. 1185, misc. supreme court of the united states june 17, 1968 h. thomas sisk and m. michael cramer, for petitioner. francis b. burch, atty. gen. of maryland, and edward f. borgerding, asst. atty. gen., for respondent. motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis and petition for writ of certiorari to the court of special appeals of maryland granted limited to the following questions: (1) is the double jeopardy clause of the fifth amendment applicable to the states through the fourteenth amendment? page 392 u.s. 925 , 926 (2) if so, was the petitioner 'twice put in jeopardy' in this case? case transferred to the appellate docket and placed on the summary calendar.

Full Judgment

BENTON v. MARYLAND. - 392 U.S. 925 (1968)
U.S. Supreme Court BENTON v. MARYLAND. , 392 U.S. 925 (1968)

392 U.S. 925

John Dalmer BENTON, petitioner,
v.
MARYLAND.
No. 1185, Misc.

Supreme Court of the United States

June 17, 1968

H. Thomas Sisk and M. Michael Cramer, for petitioner.

Francis B. Burch, Atty. Gen. of Maryland, and Edward F. Borgerding, Asst. Atty. Gen., for respondent.

Motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis and petition for writ of certiorari to the Court of Special Appeals of Maryland granted limited to the following questions:

(1) Is the double jeopardy clause of the Fifth Amendment applicable to the States through the Fourteenth Amendment?

Page 392 U.S. 925 , 926

(2) If so, was the petitioner 'twice put in jeopardy' in this case? Case transferred to the appellate docket and placed on the summary calendar.

Same Parties Benton vs Maryland. Same Subject Miscellaneous