United States v. Walter Esposito

How courts have described this case

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

• presumption would “fashion[ ] a new constitutional rule that requires prosecutors to bring all possible charges in an indictment or forever hold their peace”
• “Where a prosecutor’s conduct is equally attributable to legitimate reasons, a defendant must show actual vindictiveness for a presumption will not apply.”
• “And even if a presumption applies, the government may rebut it by proffering legitimate, objective reasons for its conduct.”
• vindictiveness is often about “the prosecutor’s decision to ‘up the ante’ by adding an additional charge” after defendant exercises right
• “[E]ven if the presumption applies, the government may re but it by proffe ring legitim ate, objec tive reaso ns for its co nduct.”
• proof that prosecution chose not to charge all possible offenses at the first trial because it would have made the trial unmanageable and would have confused the juty was sufficient to rebut the presumption

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).