Statements (58)
| Predicate | Object |
|---|---|
| gptkbp:instanceOf |
legal case
|
| gptkbp:caseOutcome |
reversed lower court decision
shaped future legal interpretations affected future prosecutions Halper_was_subjected_to_both_civil_and_criminal_penalties |
| gptkbp:caseTypes |
criminal law
88-2024 |
| gptkbp:citedBy |
490 U.S. 435
|
| gptkbp:court |
gptkb:Supreme_Court_of_the_United_States
ruled against the government |
| gptkbp:decidedBy |
gptkb:United_States_Supreme_Court
1989-06-26 |
| gptkbp:filedIn |
1989-04-25
|
| gptkbp:firstClaim |
influence on civil forfeiture laws
|
| gptkbp:historicalEvent |
involved prior civil proceedings
|
| https://www.w3.org/2000/01/rdf-schema#label |
United States v. Halper
|
| gptkbp:impact |
federal prosecution policies
|
| gptkbp:involved |
gptkb:United_States
Halper |
| gptkbp:judges |
gptkb:Justice_Antonin_Scalia
|
| gptkbp:jurisdiction |
federal jurisdiction
|
| gptkbp:legalStatus |
Double jeopardy
prohibition against double jeopardy civil penalties are not criminal punishment civil vs. criminal penalties established limits on government penalties whether civil penalties constitute punishment Halper's_attorney |
| gptkbp:notableFeature |
reviewed by legal scholars
available in legal databases summarized in law reviews cited in numerous legal opinions influenced public policy debates relevant to constitutional law subject to various critiques discussed in legal education important for understanding double jeopardy analyzed_under_the_Fifth_Amendment available_in_Supreme_Court_archives |
| gptkbp:outcome |
Supreme_Court_ruled_in_favor_of_Halper
|
| gptkbp:politicalParty |
gptkb:Justice_William_J._Brennan_Jr.
|
| gptkbp:precedent |
subsequent double jeopardy cases
civil penalties can be punitive |
| gptkbp:relatedPatent |
gptkb:Benton_v._Maryland
implications for federal enforcement Hudson_v._United_States |
| gptkbp:team |
civil rights
federalism government accountability judicial review due process administrative law criminal procedure legal precedent constitutional rights equal protection remains a landmark case |
| gptkbp:voterTurnout |
5-4
|