State v. v. Morris-Whitt

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that “[f]ines . . . are treated in the same way as prison sentences for purposes of double jeopardy and multiple punishment analysis”
• concluding that Congress did not intend cumulative penalties under 18 U.S.C. §§ 846 and 848 without undertaking a Blockburger analysis
• concluding that Congress did not intend cumulative penalties under 18 U.S.C. §§ 846 and 848 without undertaking a Blockbwrger analysis
• holding that a defendant may not raise a double jeopardy claim based on successive prosecutions when the defendant has insisted on separate trials
• holding that a defendant may not raise a double jeopardy claim based on successive prosecutions when the defendant has insisted on separate trials
• holding that Jeffer’s affirmative request for separate trials “deprived him of any right that he might .have had against consecutive trials.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).