Legal Opinion

City of Columbus v. Nappi

Ohio Supreme Court

Decided February 9, 1966No. Nos. 39352 and 39353PublishedCited by 6 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtBrown, J.

It cannot be successfully argued that this prosecution violates the constitutional provisions which require that no person shall be twice put in jeopardy for the same offense, since the constitutional provisions against double jeopardy apply only where the earlier prosecution resulted in the defendant being placed on trial. 15 Ohio Jurisprudence 2d 444, Section 261; 21 American Jurisprudence 2d 236, Criminal Law, Section 175. Procedural matters preliminary to trial do not constitute jeopardy. Collins v. Loisel, Marshal, 262 U. S. 426, 429, 67 L. Ed. 1062.

Nor can we agree that in this instance…

2Cases cited8 opinions

  1. Collins v. LoiselSupreme Court of the United States · 1923
  2. Erwin v. StateOhio Supreme Court · 1876
  3. In Re SchechtelSupreme Court of Colorado · 1938
  4. People v. HartmanIllinois Supreme Court · 1951
  5. United States v. CadarrSupreme Court of the United States · 1905

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

3Cited by6 opinions

  1. State ex rel. Haynes v. PowersOhio Supreme Court · 1969
  2. State ex rel. Turrin v. County CourtOhio Supreme Court · 1966
  3. State v. DoyleOhio Court of Appeals · 1967
  4. In Re TherklidsenOhio Court of Appeals · 1977
  5. State v. DepauloOhio Court of Appeals · 1971

1 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