Thank you for sharing!

Your article was successfully shared with the contacts you provided.
in a unanimous opinion, the justices reversed a 6th Circuit decision affirming a Michigan federal court’s grant of habeas relief to a defendant who claimed that his continued prosecution for first-degree murder after the trial court had allegedly granted a motion of acquittal on that charge violated the double jeopardy clause. Price v. Vincent, No. 02-524. Michigan’s high court had held that because the trial judge had not entered a formal judgment on the record, jeopardy had not been terminated. The 6th Circuit reversed. The justices held that the 6th Circuit erred in failing to apply the standard that the defendant was entitled to relief only if he could demonstrate that the state court’s adjudication was contrary to the Supreme Court’s clearly established precedents. Submission of the murder charge to the jury was “not an objectively unreasonable application of . . . Supreme Court law,” the justices said. Rehnquist wrote the court’s opinion.

Want to continue reading?
Become a Free ALM Digital Reader.

Benefits of a Digital Membership:

  • Free access to 1 article* every 30 days
  • Access to the entire ALM network of websites
  • Unlimited access to the ALM suite of newsletters
  • Build custom alerts on any search topic of your choosing
  • Search by a wide range of topics

*May exclude premium content
Already have an account?

Reprints & Licensing
Mentioned in a Law.com story?

License our industry-leading legal content to extend your thought leadership and build your brand.


ALM Legal Publication Newsletters

Sign Up Today and Never Miss Another Story.

As part of your digital membership, you can sign up for an unlimited number of a wide range of complimentary newsletters. Visit your My Account page to make your selections. Get the timely legal news and critical analysis you cannot afford to miss. Tailored just for you. In your inbox. Every day.

Copyright © 2021 ALM Media Properties, LLC. All Rights Reserved.