Citation network
Crist Vs. Bretz
Cites for this judgment
- US Supreme Court
- Jun 14, 1978
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
- Relied / Followed
-
U.S. 28 (1978) U.S. Supreme Court Crist v. BretzSearch
-
U.S. 28 (1978) Crist v. BretzSearch
-
The Montana Supreme Court, which had previously denied appellees habeas corpus relief, State ex rel. Bretz v. SheriSearch
-
on the ground that, under state law, Page 437 U. S. 31 jeopardy had.not attached in the first trial. State v. ClineSearch
-
had attached, a second prosecution was justified, as manifest necessity supported the first dismissal. Cunningham v. DistrictSearch
-
Brief any citation in this list with AI Studio
-
trial when the jury is empaneled and sworn. We postponed consideration of probable jurisdiction sub nom. Crist v. ClineSearch
-
must apply equally in federal and state courts. Benton v. MarylandSearch
-
prosecution of the defendant bring the guarantee against double jeopardy even potentially into play. Serfass v. UnitedSearch
-
was not destined to endure. Beginning with this Court's decision in United Page 437 U. S. 34 States v. PerezSearch
-
Thus, in Wade v. HunterSearch
-
Arizona v. WashingtonSearch
-
in jeopardy even though the criminal proceeding against him terminates before verdict was perhaps best stated in Green v. UnitedSearch
-
at which jeopardy does attach in a jury trial might have been open to argument before this Court's decision in Downum v. UnitedSearch
-
explicit authority for the proposition that jeopardy attaches when the jury is empaneled and sworn. See United States v. MartinSearch
-
Serfass v. UnitedSearch
-
the interest of an accused in retaining a chosen jury. That Page 437 U. S. 36 interest was described in Wade v. HunterSearch
-
lies at the foundation of the federal rule that jeopardy attaches when the jury is empaneled and sworn. United States v. MartinSearch
-
of the Double Jeopardy Clause. See Pointer v. TexasSearch
-
to the federal requirement of a unanimous verdict by 12 jurors, which has been held not to bind the States. Apodaca v. OregonSearch
-
Williams v. FloridaSearch
-
U. S. 78 . But see Ballew v. GeorgiaSearch
-
F.2d at 1343. In Illinois v. SomervilleSearch
-
State v. CunninghamSearch
-
although this may be as early as the opening statement. Klinefelter v. SuperiorSearch
-
State v. MojarroSearch
-
Padilla, 107 Ariz. 134, 139-140, 483 P.2d 549, 553. Until recently, New York had a similar rule. See Mizell v. AttorneySearch
-
We were informed during argument that the conviction of Merrel Cline has been reversed, see State v. ClineSearch
-
In addition to the present case, see Arizona v. WashingtonSearch
-
Burks v. UnitedSearch
-
Sanabria v. UnitedSearch
-
United States v. ScottSearch
-
Commonwealth v. CookSearch
-
for the discharge of the first jury. See, e.g., United States v. TateoSearch
-
Simmons v. UnitedSearch
-
Thompson v. UnitedSearch
-
States, 155 U. S. 271 . But it had become clear at least by the time of Kepner v. UnitedSearch
-
Id. at 195 U. S. 128 . See also United States v. DinitzSearch
-
United States v. WilsonSearch
-
Gori v. UnitedSearch
-
Kepner v. UnitedSearch
AI Brief on cited cases - 7-day free trial