Citation network
Witte Vs. United States
Cites for this judgment
- US Supreme Court
- Jun 14, 1995
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
-
Witte v. UnitedSearch
-
States - 515 U.S. 389 (1995) October Term, 1994 Syllabus Witte V. UnitedSearch
-
against multiple punishments, but the Court of Appeals reversed. Relying on this Court's decision in Williams v. OklahomaSearch
-
the latest crime, which is considered to be an aggravated offense because it is a repetitive one. See, e. g., Gryger v. BurkeSearch
-
for such conduct. See, e. g., McMillan v. PennsylvaniaSearch
-
The Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit reversed. 25 F.3d 250 (1994). Relying on our decision in Williams v. OklahomaSearch
-
bar the later action. In reaching this result, the court expressly disagreed with contrary holdings in United States v. KoonceSearch
-
Brief any citation in this list with AI Studio
-
F.2d 1145 (CAlO 1991), cert. denied, 503 U. S. 994 (1992), and United States v. McCormickSearch
-
U. S. 688 , 704 (1993) (citing North Carolina v. PearceSearch
-
Ex parte Lange, 18 Wall. 163, 173 (1874). See also Schiro v. FarleySearch
-
by its terms, it protects a criminal defendant from being twice put in jeopardy for such punishment. See Price v. GeorgiaSearch
-
Helvering v. MitchellSearch
-
in the instant indictment are conspiracy to import cocaine and attempted importation of the same. Under Blockburger v. UnitedSearch
-
Brown v. OhioSearch
-
U. S. 161 , 165 (1977). See also Ball v. UnitedSearch
-
Nichols v. UnitedSearch
-
States, 511 U. S. 738 , 747 (1994). We explained in Williams v. NewSearch
-
Nichols, supra, at 747 (quoting United States v. TuckerSearch
-
U. S. 443 , 446 (1972)). See also Wisconsin v. MitchellSearch
-
punishment for criminal activity where that activity has been considered at sentencing for a separate crime. Williams v. OklahomaSearch
-
U. S. 728 , 732 (1948). See also Spencer v. TexasSearch
-
Moore v. MissouriSearch
-
for such conduct. In McMillan v. PennsylvaniaSearch
-
Id., at 84 (quoting Patterson v. NewSearch
-
courts and to make mandatory the consideration of factors that previously would have been optional. United States v. WrightSearch
-
See also Burns v. UnitedSearch
-
Mistretta v. UnitedSearch
-
cf. Mullaney v. WilburSearch
-
in my refusal to give that jurisprudence stare decisis effect. See Planned Parenthood of Southeastern Pa. v. CaseySearch
-
text of the Clause, and from the constant tradition regarding its meaning, as we did six years ago in United States v. HalperSearch
-
Department of Revenue of Mont. v. KurthSearch
-
Wisconsin v. MitchellSearch
-
severely than a first offender because he has failed to mend his ways after a first conviction. As we noted in Moore v. MissouriSearch
-
it becomes apparent that none of the cases on which the majority relies compels today's novel holding. In Williams v. NewSearch
-
defendant would not have been placed in jeopardy for that more serious offense.2 The Court also relies on McMillan v. PennsylvaniaSearch
-
the Court's conclusion in McMillan, that case does not support the majority's position. In United States v. HalperSearch
-
U. S. 435 , 448 (1989), and Department of Revenue of Mont. v. KurthSearch
-
beyond a reasonable doubt at a criminal trial. The case on which the Court places its principal reliance, Williams v. OklahomaSearch
-
is not controlling precedent. Williams was decided over 10 years before the Court held in Benton v. MarylandSearch
-
at 794. Thus, Williams did not even apply the Double Jeopardy Clause 2The majority's reliance on Nichols v. UnitedSearch
-
Ball v. UnitedSearch
-
Syllabus Witte V. UnitedSearch
AI Brief on cited cases - 7-day free trial