Noe Morales, Jose I v. D De Correccion Y Rehabilitacion

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that Ashe does not constitutionally compel application of collateral estoppel from par-ol revocation hearings resulting in imprisonment, which are civil in nature
• explaining that collateral estoppel applies insofar as it is necessary to safeguard against the risk of double jeopardy
• rejecting the notion that collateral estoppel, as recognized in Ashe, had an existence independent of the double jeopardy clause and the latter’s requirement for prior jeopardy
• “We are unpersuaded ... by [defendant’s] attempts to erect a due process basis, independent of the double jeopardy clause, for the application of collateral estoppel.”
• same, and purpose is \ultimately to determine whether the parolee or probationer is a good risk\
• same, and purpose is “ultimately to determine whether the parolee or probationer is a good risk”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).