Court of Appeals of Iowa· 9/22/1995

State v. Swartz

Citations

541 N.W.2d 533
1995 Iowa App. LEXIS 107
1995 WL 714571

How courts have described this case

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

“[T]he Double Jeopardy Clause does not bar retrial of a defendant after a mistrial declared at the defendant’s request.”
“[R]etrial is barred if a conviction is reversed on grounds for legally insufficient evidence because such reversal is equivalent, for double jeopardy purposes, to a jury verdict of acquittal.” (citation omitted)
“[R]etrial is barred if a conviction is reversed on the ground of legally insufficient evidence because such reversal is equivalent, for double jeopardy purposes, to a jury verdict of acquittal.” (citing United States v. DiFrancesco, 449 U.S. 117, 131 (1980))

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Hayden, Sackett, Cady, Donielson, Habhab, Huitink

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

15 cases in this archive cite this case.

Cites

30 cases in this archive are cited by this case; the 20 most cited are listed.

Other cases with this 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.