Legal Opinion

Kendall v. State

Court of Appeals of Maryland

Decided November 27, 2012No. 2PublishedCited by 7 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtMcDonald, J.

The prohibition against double jeopardy, an important protection provided by the federal Constitution and our common law, precludes further prosecution of a defendant on a charge following an acquittal on that charge. That protection is triggered not only by a properly-labeled “acquittal” but also by a “ruling of the judge, whatever its label, [that] actually represents a resolution, correct or not, of some or all of the factual elements of the offense charged.”1

*480Applying the principle that the substance of a decision controls for double jeopardy purposes, our Court has held that a putative…

2Cases cited29 opinions

  1. Benton v. MarylandSupreme Court of the United States · 1969
  2. United States v. ScottSupreme Court of the United States · 1978
  3. United States v. DiFrancescoSupreme Court of the United States · 1980
  4. United States v. Martin Linen Supply Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1977
  5. Crist v. BretzSupreme Court of the United States · 1978

24 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by7 opinions

  1. State v. HamptonOhio Supreme Court · 2012
  2. Snyder v. StateCourt of Special Appeals of Maryland · 2013
  3. State v. FennellCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 2013
  4. State v. SmithCourt of Special Appeals of Maryland · 2020
  5. Johnson v. StateCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 2017

2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API