Double jeopardy: act two: justices suggest that feds can seize felons' assets
Article Abstract:
The US Supreme Court heard arguments on constitutional limits on prosecutor-ordered forfeiture in the consolidated cases of United States v. $405,089 and United States v. Ursery. The drug defendants in these cases had won double jeopardy appeals in the United States Courts of Appeals for the 6th and 9th Circuits. The 9th Circuit ruled that the post-conviction seizure of assets amounted to double jeopardy, while the 6th Circuit ruled that a criminal proceeding could not take place after a civil fine had been paid. The result will affect all future civil forfeiture actions filed concurrently with criminal charges.
Publication Name: The National Law Journal
Subject: Law
ISSN: 0162-7325
Year: 1996
User Contributions:
Comment about this article or add new information about this topic:
9th Circuit ends twinning of forfeiture, prosecution
Article Abstract:
The Ninth Circuits refusal to hear an appeal of a decision that both prosecution and forfeiture in a case is prohibited by double jeopardy has opened the courts to many lawsuits for overturning convictions or returning forfeitures. However, courts have not yet determined whether the double jeopardy decision's retroactivity is to Sep 1994 with the panel decision or to the first US Supreme Court decision on the issue in 1989. Criminals are seeking the return of seized items after their conviction or to overturn the convictions based on seizures before prosecution.
Publication Name: The National Law Journal
Subject: Law
ISSN: 0162-7325
Year: 1995
User Contributions:
Comment about this article or add new information about this topic:
L.A. cops take case to high court
Article Abstract:
Former Los Angeles police officers Stacey C Koon and Laurence M Powell want the US Supreme Court to review their cases, which stemmed from the beating of Rodney King in Mar 1991. Koon and Powell say their second trial violated the US Constitution's double-jeopardy clause, and that the 9th US Circuit Court of Appeals improperly threw out the trial judge's reductions in their sentences. The dual-sovereignty doctrine, upheld by the high court in 1994, says successive state and federal trials do not violate double-jeopardy.
Publication Name: The National Law Journal
Subject: Law
ISSN: 0162-7325
Year: 1995
User Contributions:
Comment about this article or add new information about this topic:
- Abstracts: Studies suggest that minorities still lag in admissions, tests. Arizona State bucks the critics and admits convicted murderer
- Abstracts: A prosecutor's duty; assistant A.G. resigns rather than defend conviction she feels is wrong. Hazelwood's conviction overturned; Alaska appeals court says federal law promised immunity for reporting oil spills
- Abstracts: Market withdrawal: judges and juries aren't buying what terminated dealers are selling. "Community of interest": clarity or confusion?
- Abstracts: The double-headed approach of the ECJ concerning consumer protection. Application of community law by member states' public authorities: Between autonomy and effectiveness
- Abstracts: Portable power trip: the Zeos Meridian sub-notebook packs in the punch. Going global with AT&T: the AT&T Globalyst 200 packs it all in one peculiar package