Benton v. Maryland

392 U.S. 925

Supreme Court of the United States·Decided June 17, 1968·No. No. 1185·Published·Cited by 1 cases

Opinion

Ct. Sp. App. Md. Motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis granted. Certiorari granted limited to the following questions:

(1) Is the double jeopardy clause of the Fifth Amendment applicable to the States through the Fourteenth Amendment?

H. Thomas Sisk and M. Michael Cramer for petitioner. Francis B. Burch, Attorney General of Maryland, and Edward F. Borgerd-ing, Assistant Attorney General, for respondent.

(2) If so, was the .petitioner “twice put in jeopardy” in this case?

Case transferred to appellate docket.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Ct. Sp. App. Md. Motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis granted. Certiorari granted limited to the following questions:

(1) Is the double jeopardy clause of the Fifth Amendment applicable to the States through the Fourteenth Amendment?

H. Thomas Sisk and M. Michael Cramer for petitioner. Francis B. Burch, Attorney General of Maryland, and Edward F. Borgerd-ing, Assistant Attorney General, for respondent.

(2) If so, was the .petitioner “twice put in jeopardy” in this case?

Case transferred to appellate docket.

Benton v. Maryland, 392 U.S. 925 (1968).

Pincite

392 U.S. 925 (Benton v. Maryland) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Benton v. Copinger

291 F. Supp. 141 (D. Maryland, 1968)

Opinion

Related