Citation network
Smith Vs. Massachusetts
Cites for this judgment
- US Supreme Court
- Feb 22, 2005
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
-
Syllabus October Term, 2004 Smith V. MassachusettsSearch
-
Supreme Court of the United States Smith V. MassachusettsSearch
-
Smalis v. PennsylvaniaSearch
-
s double-jeopardy cases. In United States v. MartinSearch
-
Ginsburg, J., filed a dissenting opinion, in which Rehnquist, C. J., and Kennedy and Breyer, JJ., joined. Smith v. MassachusettsSearch
-
Opinion of the Court Smith V. MassachusettsSearch
-
Supreme Court of the United States No. 03-8661 Melvin T. Smith, Petitioner V. MassachusettsSearch
-
court-decreed acquittal to the same extent it prohibits reexamination of an acquittal by jury verdict. See Richardson v. UnitedSearch
-
Sanabria v. UnitedSearch
-
United States v. MartinSearch
-
s ruling of acquittal comes in a bench trial or, as here, in a trial by jury. See Fong Foo v. UnitedSearch
-
Brief any citation in this list with AI Studio
-
Double Jeopardy Clause does not preclude a prosecution appeal to reinstate the jury verdict of guilty. United States v. WilsonSearch
-
accord, e.g., Price v. VincentSearch
-
Burks v. UnitedSearch
-
legal determination, the factfinding function being reserved to the jury. Brief for Respondent 14 (citing Commonwealth v. LowderSearch
-
to go forward with their cases while the prosecution reserved the right to present more evidence, Commonwealth v. CoteSearch
-
s proof can be reconsidered. Cf. Pennsylvania v. GoldhammerSearch
-
that a court-directed judgment of acquittal is not effective until it is signed and entered in the docket, Harden v. StateSearch
-
Ga. App. 514, 515, 287 S. E. 2d 329, 331 (1981), until a formal order is issued, State v. CollinsSearch
-
P. 2d 350, 353 (1989), or until the motion hearing is concluded, Watson v. StateSearch
-
moved for acquittal when the prosecution rested and the court erroneously denied that motion. E.g. , Smith v. StateSearch
-
Deal v. StateSearch
-
King v. ParkinSearch
-
the court to correct its legal error before it rules, or at least before the proceedings move forward. See Price v. VincentSearch
-
our cases establish that jeopardy may terminate on some counts even as it continues on others. See, e.g. , Price v. GeorgiaSearch
-
whereas in Smalis v. PennsylvaniaSearch
-
the acquittal) were impermissible. 476 U. S., at 145. Likewise, we recognized in Justices of Boston Municipal Court v. LydonSearch
-
acquittal, once final, may not be reconsidered on appeal or otherwise. The dissent misses the point of Swisher v. BradySearch
-
s finding in Swisher from the midtrial acquittal in this case. Footnote 5 In Price v. VincentSearch
-
their own, and might assume that the acquitted defendant would become available as a defense witness. Cf. Washington v. TexasSearch
-
even when the acquittal was erroneous because the evidence was sufficient. See, e.g. , Sanabria v. UnitedSearch
-
before jeopardy terminated. Burks v. UnitedSearch
-
States , 437 U. S. 1 , 11 (1978). Smith v. MassachusettsSearch
-
Ginsburg, J., Dissenting Smith V. MassachusettsSearch
-
see Commonwealth v. HaskellSearch
-
The view held by the Massachusetts court on this issue is hardly novel. See, e.g., United States v. LoRussoSearch
-
s charges. I would so hold as a matter not of double jeopardy, but of due process. See Gray v. NetherlandSearch
-
had called to her attention a decision of the Supreme Judicial Court of Massachusetts directly on point, Commonwealth v. SperrazzaSearch
-
not move to reopen the case, and the jury convicted him on all charges. Smith urges that our decision in Smalis v. PennsylvaniaSearch
-
s pro-defense ruling. See United States v. ScottSearch
-
and Swisher v. BradySearch
-
with Kepner v. UnitedSearch
-
quoting Commonwealth v. CoteSearch
-
In United States v. MartinSearch
-
Melvin T. Smith, Petitioner V. MassachusettsSearch
-
See Richardson v. UnitedSearch
AI Brief on cited cases - 7-day free trial