Brown v. Ohio
- Decided
- June 16, 1977
- Docket
- 75-6933
- Status
- Published
- Jurisdiction
- Federal
Cited 3,552 timesNo negative treatment found in this library
What later courts said
- concluding that “a greater offense is ... by definition the ‘same’ for purposes of double jeopardy as any lesser offense included in it” — United States v. Lankford (1999)
- holding that the Double Jeopardy Clause "forbids successive prosecution and cumulative punishment for a greater and lesser included offense" — State v. Bond (2015)
- holding that the Double Jeopardy Clause prohibits successive prosecution and cumulative punishment for a greater and a lesser included offense — United States v. Gerald Kaiser (1990)
Each line is a later court’s own words about this case, not a summary. Read the opinion before relying on it.
How the opinion begins
MR. Justice Powusll delivered the opinion of the Court.
The question in this case is whether the Double Jeopardy-Clause of the Fifth Amendment bars prosecution and punishment for the crime of stealing an automobile following prosecution and punishment for the lesser included offense of operating the same vehicle without the owner’s consent.
I
Cite this
Brown v. Ohio, 432 U.S. 161 (1977)Read the full opinion
Free account needed
Reading the library on this site uses your account’s daily calls, the same as the connector and the API. The Free plan needs no card. Calls a day on each plan.