[go: up one dir, main page]
More Web Proxy on the site http://driver.im/
An Entity of Type: unit of work, from Named Graph: http://dbpedia.org, within Data Space: dbpedia.org

Burks v. United States, 437 U.S. 1 (1978), is a United States Supreme Court decision that clarified both the scope of the protection against double jeopardy provided by the Fifth Amendment to the United States Constitution and the limits of an appellate court's discretion to fashion a remedy under section 2106 of Title 28 to the United States Code. It established the constitutional rule that where an appellate court reverses a criminal conviction on the ground that the prosecution failed to present sufficient evidence to prove the defendant's guilt beyond a reasonable doubt, the Double Jeopardy Clause shields the defendant from a second prosecution for the same offense. Notwithstanding the power that appellate courts have under section 2106 to "remand the cause and direct the entry of such

Property Value
dbo:abstract
  • Burks v. United States, 437 U.S. 1 (1978), is a United States Supreme Court decision that clarified both the scope of the protection against double jeopardy provided by the Fifth Amendment to the United States Constitution and the limits of an appellate court's discretion to fashion a remedy under section 2106 of Title 28 to the United States Code. It established the constitutional rule that where an appellate court reverses a criminal conviction on the ground that the prosecution failed to present sufficient evidence to prove the defendant's guilt beyond a reasonable doubt, the Double Jeopardy Clause shields the defendant from a second prosecution for the same offense. Notwithstanding the power that appellate courts have under section 2106 to "remand the cause and direct the entry of such appropriate judgment, decree, or order, or require such further proceedings to be had as may be just under the circumstances," a court that reverses a conviction for insufficiency of the evidence may not allow the lower court a choice on remand between acquitting the defendant and ordering a new trial. The "only 'just' remedy" in this situation, the Court held, is to order an acquittal. (en)
dbo:wikiPageExternalLink
dbo:wikiPageID
  • 57090585 (xsd:integer)
dbo:wikiPageLength
  • 25022 (xsd:nonNegativeInteger)
dbo:wikiPageRevisionID
  • 1116548003 (xsd:integer)
dbo:wikiPageWikiLink
dbp:arguedate
  • 0001-11-28 (xsd:gMonthDay)
dbp:argueyear
  • 1977 (xsd:integer)
dbp:case
  • Burks v. United States, (en)
dbp:courtlistener
dbp:decidedate
  • 0001-06-14 (xsd:gMonthDay)
dbp:decideyear
  • 1978 (xsd:integer)
dbp:findlaw
dbp:fullname
  • David Wayne Burks, Petitioner, v. United States (en)
dbp:googlescholar
dbp:holding
  • The Double Jeopardy Clause of the Fifth Amendment precludes a second trial once the reviewing court has found the evidence insufficient to sustain the jury's verdict of guilty. (en)
dbp:joinmajority
  • Brennan, Stewart, White, Marshall, Powell, Rehnquist, and Stevens (en)
dbp:justia
dbp:lawsapplied
dbp:litigants
  • Burks v. United States (en)
dbp:loc
dbp:majority
  • Burger (en)
dbp:notparticipating
  • Blackmun (en)
dbp:opinionannouncement
dbp:oralargument
dbp:oyez
dbp:parallelcitations
  • 172800.0 (dbd:second)
dbp:prior
  • 17280.0 (dbd:second)
dbp:uspage
  • 1 (xsd:integer)
dbp:usvol
  • 437 (xsd:integer)
dbp:wikiPageUsesTemplate
dct:subject
rdf:type
rdfs:comment
  • Burks v. United States, 437 U.S. 1 (1978), is a United States Supreme Court decision that clarified both the scope of the protection against double jeopardy provided by the Fifth Amendment to the United States Constitution and the limits of an appellate court's discretion to fashion a remedy under section 2106 of Title 28 to the United States Code. It established the constitutional rule that where an appellate court reverses a criminal conviction on the ground that the prosecution failed to present sufficient evidence to prove the defendant's guilt beyond a reasonable doubt, the Double Jeopardy Clause shields the defendant from a second prosecution for the same offense. Notwithstanding the power that appellate courts have under section 2106 to "remand the cause and direct the entry of such (en)
rdfs:label
  • Burks v. United States (en)
owl:sameAs
prov:wasDerivedFrom
foaf:isPrimaryTopicOf
foaf:name
  • David Wayne Burks, Petitioner, v. United States (en)
is dbo:wikiPageDisambiguates of
is dbo:wikiPageRedirects of
is dbo:wikiPageWikiLink of
is foaf:primaryTopic of
Powered by OpenLink Virtuoso    This material is Open Knowledge     W3C Semantic Web Technology     This material is Open Knowledge    Valid XHTML + RDFa
This content was extracted from Wikipedia and is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 3.0 Unported License