Palko v. Connecticut
Significance, Supreme Court Announces A "fundamental Fairness" Test For Constitutional Limits On State Power
Appellant
Frank Palko
Appellee
State of Connecticut
Appellant's Claim
That when the state tried him a second time for the same offense, it violated the constitutional prohibition on double jeopardy.
Chief Lawyers for Appellant
David Goldstein, George A. Saden
Chief Lawyer for Appellee
William H. Comley
Justices for the Court
Hugo Lafayette Black, Louis D. Brandeis, Benjamin N. Cardozo (writing for the Court), Charles Evans Hughes, James Clark McReynolds, Owen Josephus Roberts, Harlan Fiske Stone, George Sutherland
Justices Dissenting
Pierce Butler
Place
Washington, D.C.
Date of Decision
6 December 1937
Decision
The Supreme Court upheld the Connecticut law that permitted the state to appeal judgments, and retry defendants, in certain criminal cases.
Related Cases
- Hurtado v. California, 110 U.S. 516 (1884).
- Twining v. State of New Jersey, 211 U.S. 78 (1908).
- Adamson v. California, 332 U.S. 46 (1947).
- Benton v. Maryland, 395 U.S. 784 (1969).
Additional topics
- Palsgraf v. Long Island Railroad Company
- Olmstead v. United States - Significance, Court Rules That Wiretapping Does Not Constitute Illegal Search And Seizure, Wiretapping In America
- Palko v. Connecticut - Further Readings
- Palko v. Connecticut - Significance
- Palko v. Connecticut - Supreme Court Announces A "fundamental Fairness" Test For Constitutional Limits On State Power
- Other Free Encyclopedias
Law Library - American Law and Legal InformationNotable Trials and Court Cases - 1918 to 1940