Manigault v. State
Court of Special Appeals of Maryland
1Opinion of the Court
MOYLAN, Judge.
As we try to honor the Double Jeopardy Clause’s prohibition against multiple punishment for “the same offense,” multiple indictments pose problems in terms of adding up the legitimate units of permitted prosecution. A single multi-count indictment poses similar problems. The potential problems, however, increase exponentially when we encounter multiple multi-count indictments.
The appellant, Arnold Manigault, went to trial before a Baltimore City jury on multiple multi-count indictments. He was indisputably guilty of perpetrating assaults, in the course of a single criminal…
2Cases cited13 opinions
- Blockburger v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1931
- Newton v. StateCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1977
- Simms v. StateCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1980
- Walker v. StateCourt of Special Appeals of Maryland · 1982
- Gleaton v. StateCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1964
8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by20 opinions
- State v. JenkinsCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1986
- Lamb v. StateCourt of Special Appeals of Maryland · 1992
- United States v. McLaughlin, RicoCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 1998
- White v. StateCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1990
- Brown v. StateCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1988
15 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.