Citation network
Blackledge Vs. Perry
Cites for this judgment
- US Supreme Court
- May 20, 1974
Citation network · 7-day free trial
Brief every cited case in minutes
Open an 18-section AI Brief on any citation below, 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
No card required · credentials emailed · Log in if you already have an account
-
U.S. 21 (1974) U.S. Supreme Court Blackledge v. PerrySearch
-
U.S. 21 (1974) Blackledge v. PerrySearch
-
original one and thus subject him to a significantly increased potential period of incarceration. Cf. North Carolina v. PearceSearch
-
felony charge did not bar him from raising his constitutional claim in the federal habeas corpus proceeding. Tollett v. HendersonSearch
-
Double Jeopardy Clause of the Fifth Amendment, made applicable to the States through the Fourteenth Amendment, Benton v. MarylandSearch
-
Brief any citation in this list with AI Studio
-
to reach only the latter claim. Perry's due process arguments are derived substantially from North Carolina v. PearceSearch
-
not be imposed upon retrial unless the sentencing judge placed certain specified findings on the record. In Colten v. KentuckySearch
-
context of Colten. The Pearce decision was again interpreted by this Court last Term in Chaffin v. StynchcombeSearch
-
Cf. United States v. JacksonSearch
-
In contending that such is the case, petitioners rely chiefly on this Court's decision last Term in Tollett v. HendersonSearch
-
S. 260 . The Court answered that question in the negative. Relying primarily on the guilty plea trilogy of Brady v. UnitedSearch
-
States, 397 U. S. 742 , McMann v. RichardsonSearch
-
U. S. 759 , and Parker v. NorthSearch
-
of the State to bring the defendant into court to answer the charge brought against him. The defendants in McMann v. RichardsonSearch
-
U. S. 31 him in the Superior Court thus operated to deny him due process of law. Last Term, in Robinson v. NeilSearch
-
State v. SpencerSearch
-
State v. SparrowSearch
-
The Court of Appeals further instructed the District Court to await the ruling of this Court in Rice v. NorthSearch
-
Appeals for consideration as to whether the case had become moot. 404 U. S. 244 . Subsequently, in Colten v. KentuckySearch
-
U. S. 305 , 384 U. S. 310 . See also Griffin v. IllinoisSearch
-
Note, Civil Disabilities of Felons, 53 Va.L.Rev. 403, 406-408. Cf. O'Brien v. SkinnerSearch
-
case if the State had shown that it was impossible to proceed on the more serious charge at the outset, as in Diaz v. UnitedSearch
-
against respondent following his request for a trial de novo violated due process as defined in North Carolina v. PearceSearch
-
to a trial de novo, marks an unwarranted departure from the principles we have recently enunciated in Tollett v. HendersonSearch
-
U. S. 258 (1973), and the Brady trilogy, Brady v. UnitedSearch
-
and Parker v. NorthSearch
-
Diaz v. UnitedSearch
-
the prosecutor, who is a natural adversary of the defendant and who, we observed in Page 417 U. S. 33 Chaffin v. StynchcombeSearch
-
that of the sentencing judge in Pearce. I also think the Court passes too lightly over the reasoning of Colten v. KentuckySearch
-
violated the guarantee against double jeopardy. But the opinion of the Court, relying on cases such as United States v. BallSearch
-
U. S. 662 (1896), and Stroud v. UnitedSearch
-
the State lacked the very power to bring him to trial, I believe this case is governed by cases culminating in Tollett v. HendersonSearch
-
of double jeopardy may not, like double jeopardy, be waived by the person for whose benefit it is accorded. Kepner v. UnitedSearch
-
Harris v. UnitedSearch
-
Kistner v. UnitedSearch
-
States, 332 F.2d 978, 980 (CA8 1964). In Tollett v. HendersonSearch
-
the constitutional violations claimed to make the Page 417 U. S. 36 grand jury indictment invalid in Tollett v. HendersonSearch
-
right to a jury trial impermissibly burdened in Brady and Parker. As the Court notes, we reaffirmed in Tollett v. HendersonSearch
-
is little other than a conclusion. Any difference between the issue resolved the other way in Tollett v. HendersonSearch
-
of respondent's constitutional claim produces, at most, a violation of the standards laid down in North Carolina v. PearceSearch
AI Brief on cited cases - 7-day free trial