Skip to content
Back to judgment

Citation network

Gore Vs. United States

Cites for this judgment

  • US Supreme Court
  • Jun 30, 1958

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

40 entries 4 linked 36 unlinked
Show
  1. Morgan Vs. Devine US Supreme Court · Jun 01, 1915
  2. Burdeau Vs. Mcdowell US Supreme Court · Jun 01, 1921
  3. Snyder Vs. Massachusetts US Supreme Court · Jan 08, 1934
  4. Palko Vs. Connecticut US Supreme Court · Dec 06, 1937
  5. Gore v. United
    Search
  6. States - 357 U.S. 386 (1958) U.S. Supreme Court Gore v. United
    Search
  7. States, 357 U.S. 386 (1958) Gore v. United
    Search
  8. sentences were not unlawful. Pp. 357 U. S. 387 -393. (a) The Court adheres to the decision in Blockburger v. United
    Search
  9. be treated as a single offense when committed through a single sale. Pp. 357 U. S. 390 -391. (c) Bell v. United
    Search
  10. S.App.D.C. 315, 244 F.2d 763, with expressions of doubt by two of the judges, who felt themselves bound by Blockburger v. United
    Search
  11. but moving in related areas, may not have impaired its authority. We adhere to the decision in Blockburger v. United
    Search
  12. one of these offenses. This situation is toto coelo different from the one that led to our decision in Bell v. United
    Search
  13. severity, toward violation of the narcotics laws. Nor need we be detained by two other cases relied on, United States v. Universal
    Search
  14. C.I.T. Credit Corp., 344 U. S. 218 , and Prince v. United
    Search
  15. Carter v. McClaughry
    Search
  16. Albrecht v. United
    Search
  17. Pinkerton v. United
    Search
  18. American Tobacco Co. v. United
    Search
  19. United States v. Michener
    Search
  20. Pereira v. United
    Search
  21. For typical expressions of the attitudes of these members of the Court, see, e.g., Horning v. District
    Search
  22. Olmstead v. United
    Search
  23. Sorrells v. United
    Search
  24. the courts were warranted in punishing petitioner three times for the same transaction. I realize that Blockburger v. United
    Search
  25. that case. I find that course necessary because of my views on double jeopardy, recently expressed in Hoag v. New
    Search
  26. for three prosecutions. The different evidence test, which was adopted without much analysis by the Court in Carter v. McClaughry
    Search
  27. protect the citizen from more than one trial for the same act. That analysis was adopted by the Court in Ballerini v. Aderholt
    Search
  28. Cf. Mr. Justice Rutledge concurring in District of Columbia v. Buckley
    Search
  29. Regina v. Elrington
    Search
  30. Cox C.C. 86, 90, 1 B. & S. 688. MR. JUSTICE BRENNAN, dissenting. Even assuming the vitality of Blockburger v. United
    Search
  31. U.S. Supreme Court Gore v. United
    Search
  32. Blockburger v. United
    Search
  33. Bell v. United
    Search
  34. United States v. Universal
    Search
  35. and Prince v. United
    Search
  36. Horning v. District
    Search
  37. Hoag v. New
    Search
  38. Ballerini v. Aderholt
    Search
  39. District of Columbia v. Buckley
    Search
  40. of Blockburger v. United
    Search

AI Briefs · Semantic Search · Save & annotate judgments

Start your 7-day free trial