Bowser v. State
Nevada Supreme Court
1Concurring in part, dissenting in partStiglich, J.
I concur with the majority's adoption of a count-by-count method to determine whether a subsequent sentence is harsher than the sentence originally imposed. And therefore I agree with the majority that Bowser' second sentence "was more severe than his original sentence for due process purposes." Majority opinion ante at 543. However, I disagree with the majority's adoption of a bright line rule that a presumption of vindictiveness "does not apply where a different judge imposes a higher sentence after retrial than the first judge," Majority opinion ante at 544, and thus I respectfully dissent.
2Cases cited8 opinions
- North Carolina v. PearceSupreme Court of the United States · 1969
- Alabama v. SmithSupreme Court of the United States · 1989
- Chaffin v. StynchcombeSupreme Court of the United States · 1973
- Texas v. McCulloughSupreme Court of the United States · 1986
- United States v. RodriguezCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 2010
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.