Case Citator › Bartkus v. Illinois

Bartkus v. Illinois

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

Criticized by some courts
Court
Supreme Court of the United States
Citation
359 U.S. 121
Decided
Confirmed treatments
2
Flagged citations read
38 of 38
Citing cases (total)
38
Treatment dates
1975–1981
Criticized by some courts
At least one reviewed court has criticized this case’s reasoning. No reviewed court has overruled it. Bartkus v. Illinois has been criticized, but its rule permitting successive state and federal prosecutions has continued to be applied. All 38 flagged citations have been read.
More on how this was screened

The two adverse treatments listed below express doubt about the rule or criticize its rationale; neither overrules it.

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.

38 later cases cite Bartkus v. Illinois; 38 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 Bartkus v. Illinois?

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

Criticized

  • A Florida appellate court called the double jeopardy protection under the dual sovereignty rule illusory, while acknowledging that Bartkus still governed.

    Hernandez v. State · District Court of Appeal of Florida, First District · filed

    In view of Supreme Court decisions subsequent to Benton, however, we must restrain ourselves from the temptation to declare that Bartkus no longer governs. See United States v. Wheeler, 435 U.S. 313, 98 S.Ct. 1079, 55 L.Ed.2d 303 (1978), wherein the Court reaffirmed the Bartkus holding. We are convinced that the Fifth Amendment bar against double jeopardy, as well as the prohibition against double jeopardy found in Article I, Section 9, of the Constitution of the State of Florida, often has been an illusory protection.
    Read the full opinion on CourtListener →

Questioned

  • Justice Douglas, acting as Circuit Justice, said Benton might cast doubt on Bartkus's continuing force, without deciding that issue.

    Smith v. United States · Supreme Court of the United States (Douglas, J., in chambers) · filed

    Benton may cast doubt upon the continuing vitality of Bartkus v. Illinois, 359 U. S. 121 (1959), which found that successive state and federal prosecutions upon substantially similar charges do not violate the Double Jeopardy Clause..
    Read the full opinion on CourtListener →

Does this case still carry your argument?

Describe your facts. Ezel reads Bartkus v. Illinois 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