State v. Hopson
Washington Supreme Court
1Opinion of the CourtUtter, J.
Ervin O'Dell Hopson challenges the trial court's denial of his motion to prohibit retrial on the grounds of double jeopardy. He urges the court to interpret Washington's double jeopardy clause, Const, art. 1, § 9, to provide greater protection for defendants than its federal counterpart. The Oregon Supreme Court has enunciated a broader rule based on the provision in the Oregon State Constitution. Because the Washington provision is patterned after Oregon's provision, appellant contends it is *275appropriate to adopt the Oregon rule for determining when governmental misconduct causing a mistrial…
2Cases cited25 opinions
- Oregon v. KennedySupreme Court of the United States · 1982
- McComb v. Jacksonville Paper Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1949
- State v. KennedyOregon Supreme Court · 1983
- Walker v. IllinoisSupreme Court of the United States · 1986
- State v. Kwan Fai MakWashington Supreme Court · 1986
20 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by107 opinions
- State v. RussellWashington Supreme Court · 1994
- State v. EmeryWashington Supreme Court · 2012
- State v. BourgeoisWashington Supreme Court · 1997
- State v. GreiffWashington Supreme Court · 2000
- State v. RayWashington Supreme Court · 1991
102 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.