Legal Opinion · Dissent

State v. Canon

Wisconsin Supreme Court

Decided February 21, 2001No. 98-3519-CRPublished

1DissentWilliam A. Bablitch, J.

¶ 41. (dissenting). The majority adopts a rule that allows the State to try an acquitted defendant for perjury if the State produces "newly discovered evidence" consisting of nothing more than some third person saying, in essence, "The acquitted defendant told me that he lied under oath." This type of evidence does not contain a sufficient degree of reliability to overcome the interest of finality that underlies issue preclusion and double jeopardy. I would allow the trial of an acquitted defendant for perjury in cases where the issue of fact central to the prosecution was necessarily…

2Cases cited11 opinions

  1. Ashe v. SwensonSupreme Court of the United States · 1970
  2. Green v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1957
  3. United States v. DiFrancescoSupreme Court of the United States · 1980
  4. United States v. WilliamsSupreme Court of the United States · 1951
  5. State v. McCallumWisconsin Supreme Court · 1997

6 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