Citation network
Breed Vs. Jones
Cites for this judgment
- US Supreme Court
- May 27, 1975
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
- Distinguished
-
U.S. 519 (1975) U.S. Supreme Court Breed v. JonesSearch
-
U.S. 519 (1975) Breed v. JonesSearch
-
Double Jeopardy Clause of the Fifth Amendment, as applied to the States through the Fourteenth Amendment. See Benton v. MarylandSearch
-
sense, jeopardy describes the risk that is traditionally associated with a criminal prosecution. See Price v. GeorgiaSearch
-
Serfass v. UnitedSearch
-
Helvering v. MitchellSearch
-
U. S. 391 , 303 U. S. 398 (1938). See United States ex rel. Marcus v. HessSearch
-
One Lot Emerald Cut Stones v. UnitedSearch
-
Brief any citation in this list with AI Studio
-
is a gap between the originally benign conception of the system and its realities. With the exception of McKeiver v. PennsylvaniaSearch
-
See Green v. UnitedSearch
-
U. S. 479 , that is, when the Juvenile Court, as the trier of the facts, began to hear evidence. See Serfass v. UnitedSearch
-
there is a manifest necessity for the act, or the ends of public justice would otherwise be defeated.' United States v. PerezSearch
-
United States v. WilsonSearch
-
which such an experience represents. United States v. JornSearch
-
to which respondent would otherwise be entitled. United States v. JornSearch
-
of the case under the adult charge. See also In re Juvenile, 364 Mass. 531, 306 N.E.2d 822 (1974). Cf. Bryan v. SuperiorSearch
-
describes both a concept and a conclusion. As originally articulated by Mr. Justice Holmes in his dissent in Kepner v. UnitedSearch
-
has, in fact, derived from the rather ambiguous language and history of the Double Jeopardy Clause. See United States v. WilsonSearch
-
why an accused who has secured the reversal of a conviction on appeal may be retried for the same offense. See Green v. UnitedSearch
-
Probably a more satisfactory explanation lies in analysis of the respective interests involved. See United States v. TateoSearch
-
juvenile court to a court of general criminal jurisdiction is a matter of great significance to the juvenile. See Kent v. UnitedSearch
-
such a requirement need not affect the quality of decisionmaking at transfer hearings themselves. In Kent v. UnitedSearch
-
them to gather the information relevant to informed decision prior to an adjudicatory hearing. See generally State v. HalversonSearch
-
In reaching this conclusion, the Court of Appeals also relied on Fain v. DuffSearch
-
F.2d 218 (CA5 1973), cert. pending, No. 73-1768, and Richard M. v. SuperiorSearch
-
against public order have not similarly confined the protection of the Double Jeopardy Clause. Compare Robinson v. NeilSearch
-
U. S. 505 (1973), with Baldwin v. NewSearch
-
York, 399 U. S. 66 (1970), and Argersinger v. HamlinSearch
-
U. S. 25 (1972). For the details of Robinson's trial for violating a city ordinance, see Robinson v. HendersonSearch
-
Fain v. DuffSearch
-
Jimmy H. v. SuperiorSearch
-
U.S. Supreme Court Breed v. JonesSearch
-
the Fourteenth Amendment. See Benton v. MarylandSearch
-
See Price v. GeorgiaSearch
-
Marcus v. HessSearch
-
of McKeiver v. PennsylvaniaSearch
-
See Serfass v. UnitedSearch
-
Cf. Bryan v. SuperiorSearch
-
Kepner v. UnitedSearch
-
of the Double Jeopardy Clause. See United States v. WilsonSearch
-
See United States v. TateoSearch
-
See Kent v. UnitedSearch
-
In Kent v. UnitedSearch
AI Brief on cited cases - 7-day free trial