Call v. Gomez

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• holding that a prior version of the statute was not punitive as was required to sustain a double jeopardy challenge
• stating that “commitment under the psychopathic personality statute is remedial and does not constitute double jeopardy because it is for treatment purposes and is not for purposes of preventive detention”
• rejecting a double jeopardy challenge to the PP Act because of its treatment purposes and requirements
• rejecting a dou ble jeopardy challenge to the PP Act because of its treatment purposes and requirements
• assuming that the argument could be raised
• assuming that the argument could be raised

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).