Friday, March 23, 2012

Palko v. CT case brief

 Palko v. CT (1937)
Double jeopardy
  • (now) No fed court ability to appeal a decision adverse to the government (double jeopardy); but state court ability may exist; however, D can appeal an adverse decision. The government cannot cross-appeal if a D appeals. Government is stuck even with plain error on the judge’s part.
  • Total incorporation versus selective incorporation
  • Cardozo says “due” is that which is implicit in the concept of “ordered liberty”
  • The state “asks no more than this, that the case against him shall go on until there shall be a trial free from the corrosion of substantial legal error.”

No comments:

Post a Comment

The Evolution of Legal Marketing: From Billboards to Digital Leads Over the last couple of decades, the face of legal marketing has changed a l...