United States v. Wilson
Read the full opinion on CourtListener · The case as printed (Library of Congress)
Syllabus
The syllabus is prepared by the Reporter of Decisions and is not part of the opinion of the Court. It is shown as printed in the United States Reports, read from the text layer of the Library of Congress scan (optical character recognition in older volumes, not yet checked word by word against the page).
The jury entered a guilty verdict against respondent for a federal offense, but on one of respondent's postverdict motions the District Court dismissed the indictment on the ground that the delay between the offense and the indictment prejudiced respondent's right to a fair trial. The Court of Appeals dismissed the Government's appeal on the ground that the Double Jeopardy Clause barred review of the District Court's ruling. Because the ruling was based on facts brought out at the trial, the Court of Appeals held it was in effect an acquittal. Held: When a trial judge rules in favor of the defendant after a guilty verdict has been entered by the trier of fact, the Government may appeal from that ruling without contravening the Double Jeopardy Clause. Pp. 335-353.
Printed on p. 332 of the United States Reports, read from the text layer of the Library of Congress scan. View the page image
(a) That Clause protects against Government appeals only where there is a danger of subjecting the defendant to a second trial for the same offense, and hence such protection does not attach to a trial judge's postverdict correction of an error of law which would not grant the prosecution a new trial or subject the defendant to multiple prosecutions. Pp. 339-353.
Printed on p. 332 of the United States Reports, read from the text layer of the Library of Congress scan. View the page image
(b) Here the District Court's ruling in respondent's favor could be disposed of on appeal without subjecting him to a second trial at the Government's behest. If he prevails on appeal, the matter will become final, and the Government will not be permitted to bring a second prosecution for the same offense, whereas if he loses, the case must return to the District Court for disposition of his remaining motions. P. 353.
Printed on p. 332 of the United States Reports, read from the text layer of the Library of Congress scan. View the page image
492 F. 2d 1345, reversed and remanded.
Printed on p. 332 of the United States Reports, read from the text layer of the Library of Congress scan. View the page image
Provisions
The Constitution Annotated's essays on these provisions cite this case.
- Amendment Vsuggested link
Source: Constitution of the United States of America: Analysis and Interpretation (2022 ed.), essays Amdt5.3.1, Amdt5.3.2, Amdt5.3.5, Amdt5.3.6, Amdt5.3.6.1, Amdt5.3.6.2, Amdt5.3.6.4, Amdt5.3.7, Amdt5.3.7.1, pp. 1698, 1706, 1707, 1709, 1710.
Why it is here
The library's first set of cases is chosen by fixed rules from the Constitution Annotated (2022), which cites this case as “United States v. Wilson, 420 U.S. 332 (1975)”:
- most cited in essay topic Amdt5.3 (5 pages)