Legal Opinion

Jones v. United States

District of Columbia Court of Appeals

Decided December 29, 1995No. 95-CO-505PublishedCited by 19 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

RUIZ, Associate Judge:

George E. Jones, the appellant, brings this interlocutory appeal from the Superior Court’s denial of his motion to dismiss an indictment. Jones argues that two counts of the indictment are vague, and that the government’s prosecution on those counts is barred by the principles of double jeopardy and collateral estoppel. We hold that because Jones has never been placed in jeopardy in a proceeding related to the charged offenses, there is no valid claim of double jeopardy presented to this court that is ap-pealable interlocutorily. Accordingly, we dismiss the appeal for…

2Cases cited40 opinions

  1. Morrissey v. BrewerSupreme Court of the United States · 1972
  2. Cohen v. Beneficial Industrial Loan Corp.Supreme Court of the United States · 1949
  3. Gagnon v. ScarpelliSupreme Court of the United States · 1973
  4. Ashe v. SwensonSupreme Court of the United States · 1970
  5. Abney v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1977

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

3Cited by19 opinions

  1. Smallwood v. United States Parole CommissionDistrict Court, District of Columbia · 2011
  2. Colts v. U.S. Parole CommissionDistrict Court, District of Columbia · 2008
  3. Brown v. United StatesDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 1996
  4. Richardson v. United StatesDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 2007
  5. Taylor v. United States Parole CommissionDistrict Court, District of Columbia · 2012

14 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