United States v. Hollywood Motor Car Company, Inc., Frederic Michael Bernstein, and Terrance Quatkemeyer

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that dismissal of added charges did not preclude prosecution on original charges
• stating that the actions of the prosecutor were not “sufficient to require the invocation of such an extreme sanction as dismissal of the original, ‘untainted’ ... charges” (emphasis added)
• finding actual vindictiveness when government threat- ened to bring additional charges against defendants if they exercised their right to request change of venue
• finding actual vindictiveness when government threat- ened to bring additional charges against defendants if they UNITED STATES v. JENKINS 8685 exercised their right to request change of venue
• different principles may apply when undisputed, express threats are made by prosecutors
• where government threatened retaliation and then filed more severe indictment, later voluntary dismissal of some of the counts of the indictment to reduce the maximum sentence faced by each defendant to less than under the original indictment did not cure appearance of vindictiveness

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).