Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

429 U.S. 1053

Thompson v. Oklahoma

Supreme Court of the United States

Decided January 10, 1977

Supreme Court of the United States · decided 1977-01-10

Key passage — most relied on by later courts

“all the charges against a defendant that grow out of a single criminal act, occurrence, episode, or transaction.”

quoted by 8 later decisions, including Spradling v. Texas; And Dunn v. Texas, United States v. Frumento

Relies on Ashe v. Swenson · Waller v. Florida · Ciuzio v. United States

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Decided 1977-01-10

How this case has been cited

Cited by 277 later decisions (23 by the Supreme Court) — most recently October 2017 · most notably Brown v. Ohio (1977), Harris v. Oklahoma (1977)

124 federal appellate · 18 district · 21 state decisions — followed in 14 states

164019771980199020002010decided

Later decisions citing this case, by decade. The current decade is in progress, and our corpus holds fewer opinions from the most recent years, so the latest bars are undercounted — not a real decline.

View the full empirical analysis of this case →

¶1Ct. Crim. App. Okla. Certiorari denied.

Mr. Justice Brennan,with whom Mr. Justice Marshall joins,

¶2dissenting.

¶3Petitioner was charged by information in an Oklahoma state court with murder. After a jury trial, he was convicted of manslaughter in the first degree. Thereafter, petitioner was charged in separate informations with two additional offenses arising out of the same episode: burglary in the first degree and carrying firearms. He pleaded guilty to these offenses and was sentenced to additional concurrent terms of 10 years’ imprisonment for each offense. Petitioner then made an application for post-conviction relief in the State District Court attacking the latter two convictions on grounds of collateral estoppel and double jeopardy. The District Court denied the application, and the Oklahoma Court of Criminal Appeals affirmed.

¶4I would grant the petition for certiorari and reverse the judgment of the Court of Criminal Appeals affirming the *1054burglary and firearm convictions. I adhere to the view that the Double Jeopardy Clause of the Fifth Amendment, applied to the States through the Fourteenth Amendment, requires the prosecution in one proceeding, except in extremely limited circumstances not present here, of “all the charges against a defendant that grow out of a single criminal act, occurrence, episode, or transaction.” Ashe v. Swenson, 397 U. S. 436, 453-454 (1970) (Brennan, J., concurring). See Cousins v. Maryland, ante, p. 1027 (Brennan, J., dissenting) ; Dempsey v. United States, 423 U. S. 1079 (1976) (Brennan, J., dissenting) ; Susi v. Flowers, 423 U. S. 1006 (1975) (Brennan, J., dissenting); Vardas v. Texas, 423 U. S. 904 (1975) (Brennan, J., dissenting); Stewart v. Iowa, 423 U. S. 902 (1975) (Brennan, J., dissenting); Waugh v. Gray, 422 U. S. 1027 (1975) (Brennan, J., dissenting); Wells v. Missouri, 419 U. S. 1075 (1974) (Brennan, J., dissenting); Moton v. Swenson, 417 U. S. 957 (1974) (Brennan, J., dissenting); Tijerina v. New Mexico, 417 U. S. 956 (1974) (Brennan, J., dissenting); Ciuzio v. United States, 416 U. S. 995 (1974) (Brennan, J., dissenting); Harris v. Washington, 404 U. S. 55, 57 (1971) (concurring statement); Waller v. Florida, 397 U. S. 387, 395 (1970) (Brennan, J., concurring). See also People v. White, 390 Mich. 245, 212 N. W. 2d 222 (1973); State v. Brown, 262 Ore. 442, 497 P. 2d 1191 (1972); Commonwealth v. Campana, 452 Pa. 233, 304 A. 2d 432, vacated and remanded, 414 U. S. 808 (1973), adhered to on remand, 455 Pa. 622, 314 A. 2d 854 (1974); State v. Gregory, 66 N. J. 510, 333 A. 2d 257 (1975).

/429/us/1053 · .json · Public domain