Skip to content
Back to judgment

Citation network

Price Vs. Vincent

Cites for this judgment

  • US Supreme Court
  • Apr 21, 2003

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

34 entries 3 linked 31 unlinked
Show
  1. Woodford Vs. Visciotti US Supreme Court · Nov 04, 2002
    Relied / Followed
  2. Lockhart Vs. Nelson US Supreme Court · Nov 14, 1988
  3. Early Vs. Packer US Supreme Court · Nov 04, 2002
  4. U.S. 634 (2003) October Term, 2002 Syllabus Price, Warden V. Vincent
    Search
  5. a different result. Williams v. Taylor
    Search
  6. Supreme Court identified, and reaffirmed the principles articulated in, the applicable precedents of United States v. Martin
    Search
  7. Linen Supply Co., 430 U. S. 564 , and Sma lis v. Pennsylvania
    Search
  8. as applied to the States through the Fourteenth Amendment, barred his conviction for first-degree murder. Vincent v. Jones
    Search
  9. on the charge and that the Double Jeopardy Clause prevented respondent's prosecution for first-degree murder. People v. Vincent
    Search
  10. for purposes of determining whether a ruling terminated jeopardy. People v. Vincent
    Search
  11. Mich. 110, 119, 565 N. W. 2d 629, 632 (1997) (citing United States v. Martin
    Search
  12. Williams v. Taylor
    Search
  13. U. S. 362 , 405-406 (2000). See also Early v. Packer
    Search
  14. per curiam). Here, the Michigan Supreme Court identified the applicable Supreme Court precedents, United States v. Martin
    Search
  15. Linen Supply Co., 430 U. S. 564 (1977), and Smalis v. Pennsylvania
    Search
  16. in those decisions. People v. Vincent
    Search
  17. incorrectly. See Bell v. Cone
    Search
  18. People v. Vincent
    Search
  19. Supreme Court concluded that the judge's comments simply were not sufficiently final as to terminate jeopardy. People v. Vincent
    Search
  20. The Michigan Supreme Court noted that the comments at issue were never discussed in front of the jury, People v. Vincent
    Search
  21. for habeas relief, the judgment of the Court of Appeals is reversed. It is so ordered. 2 In United States v. LoRusso
    Search
  22. In United States v. Byrne
    Search
  23. after the court had denied the defendant's motion). See also United States v. Baggett
    Search
  24. State v. Iovino
    Search
  25. A. 2d 556, 559 (R. I. 1987) (distinguishing United States v. Martin
    Search
  26. State v. Sperry
    Search
  27. Syllabus Price, Warden V. Vincent
    Search
  28. of United States v. Martin
    Search
  29. Vincent v. Jones
    Search
  30. United States v. Martin
    Search
  31. and Smalis v. Pennsylvania
    Search
  32. See Bell v. Cone
    Search
  33. In United States v. LoRusso
    Search
  34. United States v. Baggett
    Search

AI Briefs · Semantic Search · Save & annotate judgments

Start your 7-day free trial