Legal Opinion

United States v. Hudson

Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit

Decided August 8, 1996No. 95-6030PublishedCited by 4 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

REAVLEY, Circuit Judge.

The United States appeals the dismissal on double jeopardy grounds of its criminal indictment against John Hudson, Larry Baresel, and Jack B. Rackley (“defendants” or “appellees”). Prior to being indicted the defendants had been fined by the Office of the ■ Comptroller of" the Currency (“OCC”). The defendants moved to dismiss the indictment for violating the “multiple punishments” prong of the Double Jeopardy Clause. 1 The district court granted the motion, /concluding that' the OCC fines were punishment for the same offenses charged in the indictment. Because we find…

2Cases cited9 opinions

  1. United States v. HalperSupreme Court of the United States · 1989
  2. United States v. UrserySupreme Court of the United States · 1996
  3. Hicks Ex Rel. Feiock v. FeiockSupreme Court of the United States · 1988
  4. United States v. John C. Hudson, Larry Baresel, and Jack Butler RackleyCourt of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 1994
  5. United States v. Wrw Corporation, Roger Richardson Noah Woolum and William WoolumCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1993

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

3Cited by4 opinions

  1. Hudson v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1997
  2. State v. PriceSupreme Court of South Carolina · 1998
  3. S.A. Healy Company v. Occupational Safety and Health Review Commission and Robert B. Reich, Secretary of LaborCourt of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 1996
  4. Hudson v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1997

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API