Constitutional Law--Double Jeopardy--Prosecutions by both a City and a State for an Identical Offense as a Violation of the Prohibition Against Double Jeopardy--Waller v. State

Authors

Michigan Law Review, University of Michigan Law School

Abstract

In Benton v. Maryland, decided in June of this year, the Supreme Court explicitly extended fifth amendment protection against double jeopardy to the states through the fourteenth amendment. Palko was specifically overruled to the extent that it was inconsistent with the Benton decision. Thus, the theories traditionally used to defend prosecutions by both a city and a state for the same offense must be examined to determine whether they are still valid when the fifth amendment's prohibition against double jeopardy is applied to state proceedings. This Recent Development examines the implications of the Benton decision for those theories.

Recommended Citation

Michigan Law Review, Constitutional Law--Double Jeopardy--Prosecutions by both a City and a State for an Identical Offense as a Violation of the Prohibition Against Double Jeopardy--Waller v. State, 68 Mich. L. Rev. 336 (1969).
Available at: https://repository.law.umich.edu/mlr/vol68/iss2/6