Back to Network
4
Shared Docs
4
Same-Page
4 / 4
Mentions
Document Mentions (4 shared documents)
2 mentions1 same-page
Page ?Same page
cause double jeopardy is meant to protect a defendant from successive punishments for the same offense, a multiplicitous count does not violate the Clause unless and until sentence is imposed. See Josephberg, 459 F.3d at 355 ("Where there has been no prior conviction or acquittal, the Double Jeopardy
n individual right and applies only where it results in appreciable deterrence." United States v. Eldred, 933 F.3d 110, 118 (2d Cir. 2019) (quoting Herring v. United States, 555 U.S. 135, 141 (2009)); see also Herring, 555 U.S. at 144 (concluding that "[t]o trigger the exclusionary rule, police conduct must be sufficie
2 mentions1 same-page
Page ?Same page
cause double jeopardy is meant to protect a defendant from successive punishments for the same offense, a multiplicitous count does not violate the Clause unless and until sentence is imposed. See Josephberg, 459 F.3d at 355 ("Where there has been no prior conviction or acquittal, the Double Jeopardy
n individual right and applies only where it results in appreciable deterrence." United States v. Eldred, 933 F.3d 110, 118 (2d Cir. 2019) (quoting Herring v. United States, 555 U.S. 135, 141 (2009)); see also Herring, 555 U.S. at 144 (concluding that "[t]o trigger the exclusionary rule, police conduct must be sufficie
2 mentions1 same-page
Page ?Same page
cause double jeopardy is meant to protect a defendant from successive punishments for the same offense, a multiplicitous count does not violate the Clause unless and until sentence is imposed. See Josephberg, 459 F.3d at 355 ("Where there has been no prior conviction or acquittal, the Double Jeopardy
n individual right and applies only where it results in appreciable deterrence." United States v. Eldred, 933 F.3d 110, 118 (2d Cir. 2019) (quoting Herring v. United States, 555 U.S. 135, 141 (2009)); see also Herring, 555 U.S. at 144 (concluding that "[t]o trigger the exclusionary rule, police conduct must be sufficie
Sponsored
2 mentions1 same-page
Page ?Same page
cause double jeopardy is meant to protect a defendant from successive punishments for the same offense, a multiplicitous count does not violate the Clause unless and until sentence is imposed. See Josephberg, 459 F.3d at 355 ("Where there has been no prior conviction or acquittal, the Double Jeopardy
n individual right and applies only where it results in appreciable deterrence." United States v. Eldred, 933 F.3d 110, 118 (2d Cir. 2019) (quoting Herring v. United States, 555 U.S. 135, 141 (2009)); see also Herring, 555 U.S. at 144 (concluding that "[t]o trigger the exclusionary rule, police conduct must be sufficie
Sponsored
Mutual Connections (253)
Entities connected to both Clause and Herring v. United States
Jeffrey Epstein
PERSON8 w/ Clause·4 w/ Herring
Bradley Edwards
PERSON7 w/ Clause·4 w/ Herring
United States
LOCATION7 w/ Clause·4 w/ Herring
the Southern District
LOCATION7 w/ Clause·4 w/ Herring
Colorado
LOCATION7 w/ Clause·4 w/ Herring
Stephen Hawking
PERSON6 w/ Clause·4 w/ Herring
Murphy
PERSON6 w/ Clause·4 w/ Herring
PE
Pearce
PERSON6 w/ Clause·4 w/ Herring
JP
Jeffrey Pagliuca
PERSON6 w/ Clause·4 w/ Herring
Scarlett Johansson
PERSON6 w/ Clause·4 w/ Herring
Michael Jackson
PERSON6 w/ Clause·4 w/ Herring
George Mitchell
PERSON6 w/ Clause·4 w/ Herring
Southern District of New York
ORGANIZATION6 w/ Clause·4 w/ Herring
the Second Circuit's
ORGANIZATION6 w/ Clause·4 w/ Herring
Ghislaine Maxwell
PERSON6 w/ Clause·4 w/ Herring
Supreme Court
ORGANIZATION6 w/ Clause·4 w/ Herring
North Carolina
LOCATION6 w/ Clause·4 w/ Herring
Rivera
PERSON6 w/ Clause·4 w/ Herring
Adriana Ross
PERSON6 w/ Clause·4 w/ Herring
WA
Walsh
PERSON5 w/ Clause·4 w/ Herring