Legal Opinion
Stow v. Murashige
District Court, D. Hawaii
Decided October 20, 2003No. Civil 02-00766 SOM/KSCPublishedCited by 17 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
ORDER ADOPTING AND SUPPLEMENTING AMENDED FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATION THAT PETITIONERS’ 28 U.S.C. § 2251 PETITION BE GRANTED; ORDER GRANTING PETITIONER’S 28 U.S.C. § 2251 PETITION
MOLLWAY, District Judge.
The Fifth Amendment to our nation’s Constitution declares, “[N]or shall any person be subject for the same offence to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb.” The law is no respecter of persons; the Double Jeopardy Clause is a fundamental right held by all. The most impoverished person and the most heinous criminal are as surely protected against double jeopardy as are the highest government…
2Cases cited18 opinions
- Williams v. TaylorSupreme Court of the United States · 2000
- Lindh v. MurphySupreme Court of the United States · 1997
- Lockyer v. AndradeSupreme Court of the United States · 2003
- Benton v. MarylandSupreme Court of the United States · 1969
- Green v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1957
13 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by17 opinions
- Steven Donald Stow v. Albert MurashigeCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2004
- HRPT PROPERTIES TRUST v. LingleDistrict Court, D. Hawaii · 2011
- In re the Complaint of Hyatt Corp.District Court, D. Hawaii · 2009
- Rodriguez v. General Dynamics Armament & Technical Products, Inc.District Court, D. Hawaii · 2011
- Razo v. ThomasDistrict Court, D. Hawaii · 2010
12 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.