Quinones v. United States
Quinones v. United States, 498 U.S. 1069 (1991)
Opinion of the Court
Text extracted by OCR from a scanned original; check the original for exact wording.
C. A. 2d Cir. Certiorari denied.
How later courts describe this case
Explanatory parentheticals written by citing courts — 6 in all; the most informative distinct ones are shown.
-
(recognizing, but not deciding, that the test which apparently emerges from Broce seems to turn on whether the claim of double jeopardy may be adjudicated on the face of the record, or requires supplemental evidence)
-
(applying principle of Broce in a direct constitutional challenge to a guilty plea)
-
(declining to find that Corbin overruled the "sword exception" to double jeopardy)
-
(first two counts seemingly based on one sale and one attempted sale occurring on two different dates one month apart; third count seemingly based on seizure)
-
(other bank employees could have executed same embezzlement scheme as defendant, but defendant’s position of trust which gave her authority to routinely balance her own loan transactions facilitated her embezzle-ments)
-
(embezzlement conviction under 18 U.S.C. § 656)
Cited by 32 cases
View all citing references →Relies on it most ⓘ
Citing references are not a citator: they show that a later opinion cites this case, not whether it followed, distinguished, or overruled it. Check negative history before relying on this case.