Legal Opinion

Lockhart v. Nelson

Supreme Court of the United States

Decided November 14, 1988No. 87-1277PublishedCited by 1,028 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtChief Justice Rehnquist

In this case a reviewing court set aside a defendant’s conviction of enhanced sentence because certain evidence was erroneously admitted against him, and further held that the Double Jeopardy Clause forbade the State to retry him as a habitual offender because the remaining evidence adduced at trial was legally insufficient to support a conviction. Nothing in the record suggests any misconduct in the prosecutor’s submission of the evidence. We conclude that in cases such as this, where the evidence offered by the State and admitted by the trial court — whether erroneously or not — would have…

2Cases cited39 opinions

  1. North Carolina v. PearceSupreme Court of the United States · 1969
  2. Burks v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1978
  3. Benton v. MarylandSupreme Court of the United States · 1969
  4. Tibbs v. FloridaSupreme Court of the United States · 1982
  5. Oregon v. KennedySupreme Court of the United States · 1982

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

3Cited by1,028 opinions

  1. Chambers v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas · 1991
  2. State v. HearoldSupreme Court of Louisiana · 1992
  3. State v. GuthrieWest Virginia Supreme Court · 1995
  4. Lightning Lube, Inc. v. Witco Corp.Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1993
  5. Caspari v. BohlenSupreme Court of the United States · 1994

1,023 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