United States v. Kopp

Supreme Court

United States v. Kopp

429 U.S. 121, 97 S. Ct. 400, 50 L. Ed. 2d 336, 1976 U.S. LEXIS 90

CourtSupreme Court of the United States

DecidedDecember 6, 1976

Docket75-1536

StatusPublished

Cited by12 cases

This text of 429 U.S. 121 (United States v. Kopp) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of the United States primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

United States v. Kopp, 429 U.S. 121, 97 S. Ct. 400, 50 L. Ed. 2d 336, 1976 U.S. LEXIS 90 (1976).

Pincite

Opinion

Per Curiam.

The operative facts herein are substantially identical to those in United States v. Morrison, ante, p. 1, and United States v. Rose, ante, p. 5. Respondent’s car was stopped by Border Patrol agents; a search disclosed marihuana. Respondent lost a motion to suppress and was found guilty after a bench trial. Following this trial, but before sentencing, the District Court, relying upon our decision in Almeida-Sanchez v. United States, 413 U. S. 266 (1973), dismissed the indictment. The Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit, as it did in Morrison and Rose, found the Government’s appeal barred by double jeopardy.

In United States v. Wilson, 420 U. S. 332 (1975), we held that double jeopardy would not bar a Government appeal if success on that appeal would result in the reinstatement of a verdict of guilty. The fact that the dismissal of the indictment here occurred after a general finding of guilt rendered- by the court in a bench trial, rather than after a return of a verdict of guilty by a jury, is immaterial. Morrison, supra. Double jeopardy therefore does not bar an appeal by the Government.

We grant the petition for certiorari, vacate the judgment of the Court of Appeals, and remand to that court for proceedings consistent herewith.

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

Per Curiam.

The operative facts herein are substantially identical to those in United States v. Morrison, ante, p. 1, and United States v. Rose, ante, p. 5. Respondent’s car was stopped by Border Patrol agents; a search disclosed marihuana. Respondent lost a motion to suppress and was found guilty after a bench trial. Following this trial, but before sentencing, the District Court, relying upon our decision in Almeida-Sanchez v. United States, 413 U. S. 266 (1973), dismissed the indictment. The Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit, as it did in Morrison and Rose, found the Government’s appeal barred by double jeopardy.

In United States v. Wilson, 420 U. S. 332 (1975), we held that double jeopardy would not bar a Government appeal if success on that appeal would result in the reinstatement of a verdict of guilty. The fact that the dismissal of the indictment here occurred after a general finding of guilt rendered- by the court in a bench trial, rather than after a return of a verdict of guilty by a jury, is immaterial. Morrison, supra. Double jeopardy therefore does not bar an appeal by the Government.

We grant the petition for certiorari, vacate the judgment of the Court of Appeals, and remand to that court for proceedings consistent herewith.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

429 U.S. 121, 97 S. Ct. 400, 50 L. Ed. 2d 336, 1976 U.S. LEXIS 90, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/united-states-v-kopp-scotus-1976.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack