Skip to content
Back to judgment

Citation network

Alabama Vs. Smith

Cites for this judgment

  • US Supreme Court
  • Jun 12, 1989

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

53 entries 7 linked 46 unlinked
Show
  1. Texas Vs. Mccullough US Supreme Court · Feb 26, 1986
  2. BoykIn Vs. Alabama US Supreme Court · Jun 02, 1969
  3. Bordenkircher Vs. Hayes US Supreme Court · Jan 18, 1978
    Relied / Followed
  4. North Carolina Vs. Pearce US Supreme Court · Jun 23, 1969
    Distinguished
  5. ChaffIn Vs. Stynchcombe US Supreme Court · May 21, 1973
  6. Stone Vs. Powell US Supreme Court · Jul 06, 1976
  7. Blackledge Vs. Perry US Supreme Court · May 20, 1974
    Relied / Followed
  8. U.S. 794 (1989) U.S. Supreme Court Alabama v. Smith
    Search
  9. U.S. 794 (1989) Alabama v. Smith
    Search
  10. that the increased sentence created a presumption of vindictiveness similar to that set forth in North Carolina v. Pearce
    Search
  11. not apply when a sentence imposed after trial is greater than that previously imposed after a guilty plea. Simpson v. Rice
    Search
  12. decided with North Carolina v. Pearce
    Search
  13. held that this increased sentence created a presumption of vindictiveness similar to that set forth in North Carolina v. Pearce
    Search
  14. divided vote. Ex parte Smith, 557 So.2d 13 (1988). The majority held that, under our decision in North Carolina v. Pearce
    Search
  15. discretion permits consideration of a wide range of information relevant to the assessment of punishment, see Williams v. New
    Search
  16. U. S. 134 , 475 U. S. 142 (1986) (quoting United States v. Goodwin
    Search
  17. supra, at 475 U. S. 138 . As we explained in Texas v. McCullough
    Search
  18. Ibid. See also Chaffin v. Stynchcombe
    Search
  19. supra, at 475 U. S. 138 , quoting Stone v. Powell
    Search
  20. is no such reasonable likelihood, the burden remains upon the defendant to prove actual vindictiveness, see Wasman v. United
    Search
  21. States, 468 U. S. 559 , 468 U. S. 569 (1984). In Colten v. Kentucky
    Search
  22. Id. at 407 U. S. 116 . Similarly, in Chaffin v. Stynchcombe
    Search
  23. Brady v. United
    Search
  24. into his moral character and suitability for rehabilitation. Supra, at 490 U. S. 797 . See United States v. Grayson
    Search
  25. the factors that may have indicated leniency as consideration for the guilty plea are no longer present. See Brady v. United
    Search
  26. that a judge who imposes one is motivated by vindictiveness. Our conclusion here is not consistent with Simpson v. Rice
    Search
  27. the companion case to North Carolina v. Pearce
    Search
  28. In Simpson v. Rice
    Search
  29. trials, and the Rice case, in which the first sentence was entered on a guilty plea. The failure in Simpson v. Rice
    Search
  30. some important developments in the constitutional law of guilty pleas. A guilty plea may justify leniency, Brady v. United
    Search
  31. as part of the plea bargaining process, Bordenkircher v. Hayes
    Search
  32. trial may also be pursued directly by providing for a more lenient sentence if the defendant pleads guilty, Corbitt v. New
    Search
  33. U. S. 221 -223 (1978). Part of the reason for now reaching a conclusion different from that reached in Simpson v. Rice
    Search
  34. sentence imposed after a trial is heavier than a first sentence imposed after a guilty plea, we overrule Simpson v. Rice
    Search
  35. example, the Alabama Supreme Court's decision in the instant case, Ex parte Smith, 557 So.2d 13 (1988), State v. Sutton
    Search
  36. Conn.485, 498 A.2d 65 (1985), and United States v. Gilliss
    Search
  37. F.2d 1269 (CA8 1981), with State v. Bawdon
    Search
  38. N.W.2d 484 (S.D.1986), and McKenzie v. Risley
    Search
  39. similar prophylactic rule to guard against vindictiveness by the prosecutor at the postconviction stage in Blackledge v. Perry
    Search
  40. a mere opportunity for vindictiveness is insufficient to justify the imposition of a prophylactic rule.' United States v. Goodwin
    Search
  41. U.S. Supreme Court Alabama v. Smith
    Search
  42. Simpson v. Rice
    Search
  43. Williams v. New
    Search
  44. Wasman v. United
    Search
  45. In Colten v. Kentucky
    Search
  46. See United States v. Grayson
    Search
  47. See Brady v. United
    Search
  48. Corbitt v. New
    Search
  49. State v. Sutton
    Search
  50. and United States v. Gilliss
    Search

AI Briefs · Semantic Search · Save & annotate judgments

Start your 7-day free trial