Citation network
Lockhart Vs. Nelson
Cites for this judgment
- US Supreme Court
- Nov 14, 1988
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. 33 (1988) U.S. Supreme Court Lockhart v. NelsonSearch
-
U.S. 33 (1988) Lockhart v. NelsonSearch
-
had in fact been pardoned, and set aside the enhanced sentence. The District Court then held, in reliance on Burks v. UnitedSearch
-
Jeopardy Clause of the Fifth Amendment, made applicable to the States through the Fourteenth Amendment, see Benton v. MarylandSearch
-
direct appeal or collateral attack, because of some error in the proceedings leading to conviction. United States v. BallSearch
-
Ibid. In Burks v. UnitedSearch
-
Brief any citation in this list with AI Studio
-
Greene v. MasseySearch
-
the inadmissible evidence there was insufficient evidence to support a conviction -- was expressly reserved in Greene v. MasseySearch
-
Tibbs v. FloridaSearch
-
United States v. ScottSearch
-
the court. We therefore have no occasion to consider what the result would be if the case were otherwise. Cf. Oregon v. KennedySearch
-
this claim because of respondent's failure to make a contemporaneous objection to the use of that conviction. Nelson v. StateSearch
-
of a pardon, unsupported by any factual evidence, was an insufficient basis on which to grant relief. Nelson v. StateSearch
-
Clause limits the State's power to subject a defendant to successive capital sentencing proceedings, see Bullington v. MissouriSearch
-
U. S. 430 (1981), carries over to noncapital sentencing proceedings, see North Carolina v. PearceSearch
-
retrial is prohibited after a conviction is set aside by an appellate court for evidentiary insufficiency, see Burks v. UnitedSearch
-
instead by a federal habeas court in a collateral attack on a state conviction, see Justices of Boston Municipal Court v. LydonSearch
-
United States v. Gonzalez-SanchezSearch
-
United States v. HodgesSearch
-
Webster v. DuckworthSearch
-
United States v. MarshallSearch
-
United States v. BibberoSearch
-
United States v. TranowskiSearch
-
United States v. Sarmiento-PerezSearch
-
United States v. MandelSearch
-
Harris v. StateSearch
-
People v. RiosSearch
-
People v. SisnerosSearch
-
State v. GraySearch
-
Hall v. StateSearch
-
People v. TaylorSearch
-
Morton v. StateSearch
-
Commonwealth v. MattinglySearch
-
Commonwealth v. TaylorSearch
-
State v. WoodSearch
-
Roeder v. StateSearch
-
State v. LamorieSearch
-
State v. VanSearch
-
Clause for Arkansas to attempt again. I believe, however, that Nelson's retrial is squarely foreclosed by Burks v. UnitedSearch
-
Green v. UnitedSearch
-
against double jeopardy prevents retrial where a State's evidence at trial is found insufficient. See also Hudson v. LouisianaSearch
AI Brief on cited cases - 7-day free trial