Supreme Court· 5/27/2014

Martinez v. Illinois

Citations

134 S. Ct. 2070
188 L. Ed. 2d 1112
2014 U.S. LEXIS 3613
82 U.S.L.W. 4414
572 U.S. 833
24 Fla. L. Weekly Fed. S 777
2014 WL 2178529

How courts have described this case

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

stating that the conclusion that jeopardy attached is just the beginning, rather than the end, of the inquiry as to whether the double jeopardy clause bars retrial
reversing judgment of Illinois Supreme Court that would have permitted state to retry defendant because “[o]ur cases have repeatedly stated the bright-line rule that jeopardy attaches when the jury is empaneled and sworn”
defining “acquittal” to mean a ruling that “actually represents a resolution . . . of some or all of the factual elements of the offense charged” (alteration in original) (quoting Martin Linen, 430 U.S. at 571)
“There are few if any rules of criminal procedure clearer than the rule that jeopardy attaches when the jury is empaneled and sworn.” (punctuation omitted)
“A jury trial begins, and jeopardy attaches, when the jury is sworn.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Per Curiam

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

40 cases in this archive cite this case; the 20 most cited are listed.

Cites

11 cases in this archive are cited by this case.

Other cases named Martinez v. Illinois

5 other CourtListener records share this case name.

Sourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).

This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.