Legal Opinion

in Re: Petition of Blenka (Michael)

Nevada Supreme Court

Decided May 30, 2013No. 61294Unpublished

1Opinion of the Court

Jeopardy Clause. The State now appeals, arguing that the district court erred in concluding that double jeopardy barred the State's prosecution of the felony because: (1) double jeopardy does not bar subsequent prosecution when the court lacks jurisdiction to hear all the charges; and (2) Blenka cannot avoid prosecution for a felony DUI by pleading guilty to a misdemeanor DUI. The double jeopardy clause does not permit Blenka's continued prosecution for a felony DUI after pleading guilty to misdemeanor DUI arising from the same set of facts as the felony charge The parties do not dispute that…

2Cases cited15 opinions

  1. Blockburger v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1931
  2. Brown v. OhioSupreme Court of the United States · 1977
  3. Green v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1957
  4. Illinois v. VitaleSupreme Court of the United States · 1980
  5. Diaz v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1912

10 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