Legal Opinion · Concurring in part, dissenting in part

State v. Zawodniak

Supreme Court of Arkansas

Decided June 23, 1997No. CR 96-1503Published

1Concurring in part, dissenting in partRay Thornton, Justice

While I agree with the majority that the trial court erred in granting a directed verdict acquitting appellee of simultaneous possession of drugs and firearms, I respectfully disagree that appellee can be tried a second time for the same offense. He was put in jeopardy, found guilty of the crime of possession of a controlled substance and possession of drug paraphernalia, and sentence was imposed.

The Double Jeopardy Clause of the Fifth Amendment states: “[N]or shall any person be subject for the same offence [sic] to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb.” Article 2, § 8, of the Arkansas…

2Cases cited13 opinions

  1. Brown v. OhioSupreme Court of the United States · 1977
  2. Green v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1957
  3. United States v. ScottSupreme Court of the United States · 1978
  4. United States v. DiFrancescoSupreme Court of the United States · 1980
  5. United States v. Martin Linen Supply Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1977

8 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