United States v. Ursery
Significance, Guy Ursery Grows His Own, Various Items, Emerald Cut Stones, And 89 Firearms
That "in rem" civil property forfeiture proceedings, combined with a prison sentence for "manufacturing" marijuana, did not constitute double jeopardy in violation of the Fifth Amendment.
Chief Lawyer for Petitioner
Drew S. Days III, U.S. Solicitor General
Chief Lawyers for Respondent
Lawrence Robbins, David Michael, Jeffry K. Finer
Justices for the Court
Stephen Breyer, Ruth Bader Ginsburg, Anthony M. Kennedy, Sandra Day O'Connor, William H. Rehnquist (writing for the Court), Antonin Scalia, David H. Souter, Clarence Thomas
John Paul Stevens
Date of Decision
24 June 1996
That, according to a two-part test which found that the property forfeiture was civil and remedial, not criminal and punitive, the seizure of property did not constitute a "punishment" as such; hence, this was not a case of double jeopardy.
Carp, Robert A. Judicial Procedure in America. Washington, DC: CQ Press, 1998.
"Report on Cocaine and Federal Sentencing Policy." United States Sentencing Commission, http://www.ussc.gov.
- United States v. Virginia - Significance, Sex Discrimination At V.m.i., History Repeats Itself, A Catch -22
- United States v. Scheffer - Significance, Airman Scheffer Claims "innocent Ingestion", A Question Of Legitimate Interests, "a Serious Undervaluation" Of Constitutional Rights
- United States v. Ursery - Significance
- United States v. Ursery - Further Readings
- United States v. Ursery - Guy Ursery Grows His Own
- United States v. Ursery - Various Items, Emerald Cut Stones, And 89 Firearms
- United States v. Ursery - Concurrence And Dissent: Standing Austin On Its Head
- United States v. Ursery - Impact
- United States v. Ursery - Related Cases
- United States v. Ursery - Criminal Cases V. Civil Cases
- United States v. Ursery - The War On Drugs
- Other Free Encyclopedias