Gonzalez v. Eighth Judicial District Court of the State of Nevada ex rel. County of Clark
Nevada Supreme Court
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION
2Per curiam
At issue in this petition for extraordinary writ relief is the proper analysis of a Double Jeopardy Clause claim when it is based upon the doctrine of collateral estoppel. We conclude that Ashe v. Swenson, 397 U.S. 436, 444 (1970), sets forth the proper analysis for determining whether an issue of ultimate fact has been decided and cannot be relitigated in a subsequent trial: The district court must examine the record of the first trial and determine whether a rational jury could have grounded its verdict on some other issue of fact. And, in conducting this analysis, the district court…
3Cases cited8 opinions
- Ashe v. SwensonSupreme Court of the United States · 1970
- Taylor v. SturgellSupreme Court of the United States · 2008
- Dowling v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1990
- Yeager v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 2009
- Harris v. WashingtonSupreme Court of the United States · 1971
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
4Cited by9 opinions
- State v. Eighth Judicial Dist. Court of Nev.Nevada Supreme Court · 2018
- GRANADA-RUIZ (GAMBINO) VS. DIST. CT. (STATE)Nevada Supreme Court · 2018
- GRANADA-RUIZ (GAMBINO) VS. DIST. CT. (STATE)Nevada Supreme Court · 2018
- Granada-Ruiz v. Eighth Judicial Dist. Court of Nev.Nevada Supreme Court · 2018
- Pricewaterhousecoopers Llp Vs. Dist. Ct. (Tricarichi)Nevada Supreme Court · 2021
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.