Legal Opinion
Commonwealth v. Smith
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
Decided September 18, 1992No. 83 M.D. Appeal Docket 1991PublishedCited by 235 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION OF THE COURT
FLAHERTY, Justice.
In this infamous murder case, we are compelled to order the discharge of appellant Jay C. Smith. Despite our prior holding granting a retrial, Commonwealth v. Smith, 523 Pa. 577, 568 A.2d 600 (1989), we now hold that the prosecutorial misconduct during appellant’s first trial was not only impermissible, but had constitutional implications under the double jeopardy clause which prohibit retrial.
At issue is whether the double jeopardy clause bars retrial following intentional prosecutorial misconduct designed to secure a conviction through the concealment…
2Cases cited7 opinions
- Brady v. MarylandSupreme Court of the United States · 1963
- Oregon v. KennedySupreme Court of the United States · 1982
- United States v. DinitzSupreme Court of the United States · 1976
- Commonwealth v. SmithSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1989
- Commonwealth v. StarksSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1980
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by235 opinions
- Ex Parte LewisCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas · 2007
- Commonwealth v. ChmielSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 2005
- Commonwealth v. HawkinsSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1997
- Commonwealth v. BurkeSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 2001
- Pap's A.M. v. City of ErieSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 2002
230 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.