State v. David Willard Phipps, Jr.
Tennessee Supreme Court
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION
DROWOTA, Justice.
In this appeal, we must determine whether the State’s decision to pursue the death penalty, following the defendant’s successful appeal of his conviction for which the death penalty originally was not sought, gives rise to a rebuttable presumption of prosecutorial vindictiveness. After carefully considering the relevant legal principles, we conclude that the rebuttable presumption of vindictiveness applies in this case. Because the State had no opportunity, during the hearing on the motion to strike, to introduce proof to overcome the presumption, we reverse the…
Also in this document: Concurrence.
2Cases cited28 opinions
- North Carolina v. PearceSupreme Court of the United States · 1969
- Bordenkircher v. HayesSupreme Court of the United States · 1978
- Blackledge v. PerrySupreme Court of the United States · 1974
- United States v. GoodwinSupreme Court of the United States · 1982
- Colten v. KentuckySupreme Court of the United States · 1972
23 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by14 opinions
- Momon v. StateTennessee Supreme Court · 2000
- State v. BaneTennessee Supreme Court · 2001
- David CANTRELL v. Joe EASTERLING, WardenTennessee Supreme Court · 2011
- David Cantrell v. Joe Easterling, WardenTennessee Supreme Court · 2011
- Michael Bailey v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Tennessee · 2000
9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.