Skip to content
Back to judgment

Citation network

Missouri Vs. Hunter

Cites for this judgment

  • US Supreme Court
  • Jan 19, 1983

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

63 entries 3 linked 60 unlinked
Show
  1. North Carolina Vs. Pearce US Supreme Court · Jun 23, 1969
  2. United States Vs. Benz US Supreme Court · Jan 05, 1931
  3. Cichos Vs. Indiana US Supreme Court · Nov 14, 1966
  4. U.S. 359 (1983) U.S. Supreme Court Missouri v. Hunter
    Search
  5. U.S. 359 (1983) Missouri v. Hunter
    Search
  6. under the test announced in Blockburger v. United
    Search
  7. Clause precludes the imposition, in a single trial, of cumulative punishments pursuant to those statutes. Whalen v. United
    Search
  8. Albernaz v. United
    Search
  9. W.2d 374 (1981). The Court of Appeals relied entirely upon the holding of the Missouri Supreme Court opinions in State v. Haggard
    Search
  10. Sours v. State
    Search
  11. and Sours v. State
    Search
  12. action based on the robbery. The Missouri Supreme Court concluded that, under the test announced in Blockburger v. United
    Search
  13. State sought review here in Sours I, we remanded the case for reconsideration in light of our holding in Whalen v. United
    Search
  14. States, 445 U. S. 684 (1980). Missouri v. Sours
    Search
  15. Most recently, in State v. Haggard
    Search
  16. reexamined its decisions in Sours I, supra, and Sours II, supra, in light of our 1981 holding in Albernaz v. United
    Search
  17. Burks v. United
    Search
  18. State, 437 U. S. 1 , 437 U. S. 11 (1978), quoting Green v. United
    Search
  19. than prevent the sentencing court from prescribing greater punishment than the legislature intended. In Whalen v. United
    Search
  20. of the crime of rape was contrary to federal statutory and constitutional law. A divided Court relied on Blockburger v. United
    Search
  21. construction, we held that cumulative punishment could not be imposed under the two statutes. In Albernaz v. United
    Search
  22. under Blockburger. See, e.g., American Tobacco Co. v. United
    Search
  23. statutes be cumulative. We are bound to accept the Missouri court's construction of that State's statutes. See O'Brien v. Skinner
    Search
  24. S.W.2d at 211, quoting Murray v. State
    Search
  25. convictions for both armed criminal action and the underlying felony did not violate the Double Jeopardy Clause. State v. Treadway
    Search
  26. State v. Valentine
    Search
  27. State v. Kane
    Search
  28. Sours II was denied. JUSTICE BLACKMUN and JUSTICE REHNQUIST would have dismissed the petition as moot. Missouri v. Sours
    Search
  29. decisions that had reversed convictions for armed criminal action on the basis of Sours II. See, e.g., Missouri v. Counselman
    Search
  30. Certiorari granted, judgments vacated, and cases remanded for further consideration in light of Albernaz v. United
    Search
  31. North Carolina v. Pearce
    Search
  32. See Harris v. Oklahoma
    Search
  33. Brown v. Ohio
    Search
  34. First-degree robbery and armed criminal action constitute the same offense under the test set forth in Blockburger v. United
    Search
  35. consequences, in both the jurisdiction in which the conviction is obtained and in other jurisdictions. See Benton v. Maryland
    Search
  36. Sibron v. New
    Search
  37. conviction imposes an additional stigma and causes additional damage to the defendant's reputation. See O'Clair v. United
    Search
  38. is irrelevant for purposes of the Double Jeopardy Clause where no other underlying felony is, in fact, charged. Sours v. State
    Search
  39. S.W.2d 208, 217-220 (Mo.), vacated and remanded, 446 U.S. 962 (1980). Cf. Harris v. Oklahoma
    Search
  40. Although the majority relies on a passage in Albernaz v. United
    Search
  41. multiple punishment for two crimes that do constitute the same offense under the Blockburger test. Whalen v. United
    Search
  42. not be submitted to the jury if the element that distinguishes the two offenses is not in dispute. See, e.g., Sansone v. United
    Search
  43. United State v. Tsanas
    Search
  44. did not, 284 U.S. at 284 U. S. 304 , the Court relied on Justice Brandeis' opinion for the Court in Albrecht v. United
    Search
  45. U.S. Supreme Court Missouri v. Hunter
    Search
  46. Blockburger v. United
    Search
  47. Whalen v. United
    Search
  48. State v. Haggard
    Search
  49. Missouri v. Sours
    Search
  50. Green v. United
    Search

AI Briefs · Semantic Search · Save & annotate judgments

Start your 7-day free trial