Grady v. Corbin

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
Grady v. Corbin
Seal of the United States Supreme Court.svg
Argued March 21, 1990
Decided May 29, 1990
Full case name William V. Grady, District Attorney of Dutchess County v. Thomas J. Corbin
Citations 495 U.S. 508 (more)
110 S.Ct. 2084
Prior history Certiorari to the Court of Appeals of New York
Holding
The Double Jeopardy Clause bars a subsequent prosecution if, to establish an essential element of an offense charged in that prosecution, the government will prove conduct that constitutes an offense for which the defendant has already been prosecuted.
Court membership
Case opinions
Majority Brennan, joined by White, Marshall, Blackmun, Stevens
Dissent O'Connor
Dissent Scalia, joined by Rehnquist, Kennedy
Overruled by
United States v. Dixon, 509 U.S. 688 (1993)

Grady v. Corbin, 495 U.S. 508 (1990), was a decision by the United States Supreme Court, which held that: "the Double Jeopardy Clause bars a subsequent prosecution if, to establish an essential element of an offense charged in that prosecution, the government will prove conduct that constitutes an offense for which the defendant has already been prosecuted."[1]

Background[edit]

In the fall of 1987, Corbin was driving under the influence as he drove his automobile across the center line of a New York highway and collided with two oncoming vehicles. Brenda Dirago, the driver of the second vehicle, died in this accident while her husband was seriously injured. Later that same day, Corbin was charged with DUI and pleaded guilty. The Supreme Court ruled that to try him now for homicide would constitute double jeopardy.[2]

Case Overturned[edit]

Grady v. Corbin was only valid law for three years. It was overturned by Dixon v. United States, 509 U.S. 688 (1993), which rejected the same conduct test in favor of the longstanding same element test. The same element test had been the law since Blockburger v. United States, 284 U.S. 299 (1932).

See also[edit]

References[edit]

  1. ^ "GRADY V. CORBIN, 495 U. S. 508 (1990)". Justia. Retrieved 2008-08-30. 
  2. ^ Foderaro, Lisa W. (1990-06-02). "Double-Jeopardy Ruling Compounds Grief". New York Times. 

Further reading[edit]

  • Barton, S. (1990). "Grady v. Corbin: An Unsuccessful Effort to Define Same Offense". Georgia Law Review 25: 143. ISSN 0016-8300. 
  • Brudzinski, Walter J.; Farashahi, Afshin (1992). "Double Jeopardy in Successive Prosecutions: The Impact of Grady v. Corbin". Thomas Jefferson Law Review 14: 181. ISSN 1090-5278. 
  • McGinnis, L. A. (1990). "Grady v. Corbin: Doubling the Scope of the Double Jeopardy Clause". Ohio Northern University Law Review 17: 873. ISSN 0094-534X. 
  • Webre, C. J. (1990). "Grady v. Corbin: Successive Prosecutions Must Survive Heightened Double Jeopardy Protection". Loyola Law Review 36: 1171. ISSN 0192-9720.