History
  • No items yet
midpage
Jernigan v. Louisiana
446 U.S. 958
SCOTUS
1980
Check Treatment

*1 in spiracy kilogram heroin, distribute the same violation charge guilty of U. C. pleaded 846. He to the second § 3-year special and was in years prison sentenced to and a parole concurrently term to be served with the first sentence. challenged Petitioner the second conviction under alleging Jeopardy 2256, § it was barred Double that Clause. The District Court denied and the Court relief, Appeals affirmed. conspiracy

Indictments for and for the substan- underlying tive сriminal arising offense are indictments the same out of Dempsey States, v. S. 1079 transaction. dissenting); Ciuzio (Brennan, (1976) J., 416 U. S. 995 (1974) J., dissenting). Therefore, (Brennan, I petition certiorari and remand with directions that the writ оf be and the corpus granted habeas my second conviction vacated. adhere view that Double Clause Jeopardy requires prosecution in pro- one except ceeding, extremely in limited present ‍​​​​​‌​‌​​​​‌​​​‌​​​‌‌‌‌​‌​‌‌​‌‌‌‌​​​​​​​​‌‌‌​‌‌‍circumstances not “all here, charges against grow defendant out of single criminal act, occurrence, or episode, transaction.” Swenson, Ashe 453-454 (1970) (Brennan, Oklahoma, concurring). Thompson J., (1977) (Brennan, J., dissenting), and cases colleсted therein. Jernigan 79-6242.

No. Louisiana. Sup. Ct. La. Cer- tiorari

Mr. Justice White, with whom Justice Mr. Brennan and Mr. Justice Marshall join, dissenting. New Orleans, La., received tele-

phone call them that a black male informing wearing a yellow shirt pants blue with a armed handgun could be found sitting A dispatch Sander's Bar. radio went out, and Officer Williams proceeded to the bar. Of the 10 or persons in the bar, petitioner was the one wearing а yellow pants. shirt blue Officer approached Williams directed him stand, petitioner, frisked him. The pocket; he removed pants detected charged who petitioner and arrested revolver a .38-caliber *2 firearm of by possession Louisiana law of with violation felony. of a convicted having previously been after motion denial of In the trial court’s sustaining Suрreme Louisiana seized, as the illegally suppress the to the Amendment would render Fourth notеd that the Court have sufficient if officer did not inadmissible the evidence reason- amount and сircumstances knowledge facts of also The investigatory detention. court for an ablе cause Williams, recog- that Adams v. 143 (1972), noted police officer with provide can tip an informer’s nized that But suspect. the question to detain and cause ‍​​​​​‌​‌​​​​‌​​​‌​​​‌‌‌‌​‌​‌‌​‌‌‌‌​​​​​​​​‌‌‌​‌‌‍reasonable and this cаse further the difference between noted court Adams, an presented whether narrow here was for the issue tip if the was cause provide could reasonable tip informer’s rе- court, if the information anonymous. According to the of indicia anonymous enough carriеd tipster from ceived the corrob- of information and reliability, specificity such as the was police anonymous tip by independent work, the oration justified prompt action рolice sufficient. Moreover, real an immediate and the information would where indicаte danger to public. the directly tip an anonymous have whether

We not decided stoр for a and frisk. We suspicion furnish reasonable may the emphasized specificity providеd, have of information the the independent corroboration the officer, the and Adams, g., Draper e. supra; danger public. to the See, (1959). But the decided cases, reliability. these were not the factors indicia Draper in Adams The informers were known to have provided known were reliable information anonymous same cannot be said of past. tipster. Louisiana Supreme the decision Court is

Arguably, prior which require inconsistent with our cases reason- suspicion sufficiently be based on a reliable able informer’s tip. certiorari for this reason and also because reliability tipster of an or unidentified is an that has divided the Appeals. issue Federal Courts of Com United States v. pare McLeroy, F. 2d (CA5 1978), States Robinson, F. (CA9 1976) 2d 1298 (no Hernandez, reasonable with United suspicion), States v. 614 (CA7 1973) 486 F. 2d (per curiam) (reasonable suspicion), (1974). rt. dеnied, 415 U. S. 959 also United ce Gorin, (CA4 States v. 2d 159 1977), denied, cert. F. U. S. 1080 (1978), United States Unverzagt, ‍​​​​​‌​‌​​​​‌​​​‌​​​‌‌‌‌​‌​‌‌​‌‌‌‌​​​​​​​​‌‌‌​‌‌‍424 F. 2d (CA8 1970) (identity of proof informеr known but no reliability; suspicion his reasonable *3 found). state courts similarly are Accordingly, divided. dissеnt from the denial of certiorari.

No. 79-5940. Turner v. Mitchell, Warden, 445 U. S. 966; Gray

No. 79-6057. ante, p. 911; Lillibridge No. 79-6092. ‍​​​​​‌​‌​​​​‌​​​‌​​​‌‌‌‌​‌​‌‌​‌‌‌‌​​​​​​​​‌‌‌​‌‌‍et Commissioner ux. Internal 967; Revenue,

No. 79-6171. Attwell et al. v. LaSalle National Bank et al., 954; Boalbey

No. 79-6178. antе, v. Kindred, p. 912; and Attorney No. 79-6186. Noe Civiletti, et General, U. S. 969. Petitions al., rehearing

May No. 78-1653. North Carolinа Wildlife Resources Com mission et al. Eastern Band ‍​​​​​‌​‌​​​​‌​​​‌​​​‌‌‌‌​‌​‌‌​‌‌‌‌​​​​​​​​‌‌‌​‌‌‍of Cherokee Indians. 4th Cir. A. Certiorari dismissed under this Court’s Rule 60.

Case Details

Case Name: Jernigan v. Louisiana
Court Name: Supreme Court of the United States
Date Published: May 19, 1980
Citation: 446 U.S. 958
Docket Number: 79-6242
Court Abbreviation: SCOTUS
AI-generated responses must be verified and are not legal advice.