Case Citator › Green v. United States

Green v. United States

Is it still good law? What later courts have actually done to this case.

Limited by some courts
Court
Supreme Court of the United States
Citation
355 U.S. 184
Decided
Confirmed treatments
1
Flagged citations read
92 of 92
Citing cases (total)
3,046
Treatment dates
1979
Limited by some courts
At least one reviewed court has limited this case’s holding to narrower facts or a narrower rule. No reviewed court has overruled it. Green v. United States is limited among the reviewed cases: all 92 flagged citations have been read, with one live confirmed treatment listed below. State v. Taylor declined to extend Green's implicit-acquittal rule to a court's acceptance of a guilty plea to a lesser included offense.
More on how this was screened

State v. Thomas had earlier declined to follow Green because the Fifth Amendment's double-jeopardy protection had not yet been incorporated against the states, but Benton v. Maryland displaced that premise and the Supreme Court of Arizona then repudiated Thomas's contrary rule in State v. Maloney, so Thomas is not listed as a live treatment. The other opinions applied Green, distinguished its own jury-acquittal boundary, or directed nearby adverse language at other cases.

Every treatment on this page is written from the citing opinion itself, with a verbatim quote, never copied from a commercial citator. A citation flagged by our screen but not shown here was read and found not to weaken this case.

3,046 later cases cite Green v. United States; 92 of those citations sat close to treatment language and were flagged for reading, and all of them have been read. Citations that did not sit near treatment language were not flagged and were not read one by one, so a court that weakened this case without using any of that language would not appear here.

Relying on Green v. United States?

This page shows what later courts did to it. Ask about your specific facts and see whether it still carries your argument, with citations you can check.

Treatments

Limited

  • The Washington Court of Appeals declined to extend Green's implicit-acquittal rule to a court's acceptance of a guilty plea to a lesser included offense.

    State v. Taylor · Washington Court of Appeals · filed

    In State v. Schoel, 54 Wn.2d 388, 341 P.2d 481 (1959), our Supreme Court expressly overruled State v. Ash, 68 Wash. 194, 122 P. 995 (1912) and held that a jury conviction of second-degree murder barred the refiling of a charge of first-degree murder upon retrial. The court adopted the rationale of the United States Supreme Court in Green v. United States, 355 U.S. 184, 190, 2 L. Ed. 2d 199, 78 S. Ct. 221, 6 A.L.R.2d 1119 (1957) that when a jury is given the choice of finding an accused guilty of either first- or second-degree murder, a conviction of the lesser degree is an "implicit acquittal on the charge of first degree murder." Taylor's challenge, however, presents a question of first impression for this jurisdiction: Is the acceptance by the court of a guilty plea to a lesser included offense the constitutional equivalent of a jury's "implicit acquittal" on the greater charge? The precise question has not been considered by the United States Supreme Court. Antithetic conclusions have been reached by jurisdictions which have considered the question. We are persuaded that the better-reasoned decisions are those which hold that the acceptance of a guilty plea to a lesser included offense is not, for double jeopardy purposes, an implicit acquittal on the greater charge.
    Read the full opinion on CourtListener →

Does this case still carry your argument?

Describe your facts. Ezel reads Green v. United States and the cases that treated it, then tells you whether it still holds for your situation, with citations.

Opens in Ezel Pro.

  • Checks the law as it stands today, not only this page
  • Cites every source it relies on, so you can verify it
  • Chat, drafting and research in one workspace