Case Citator › United States v. Tateo

United States v. Tateo

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
377 U.S. 463
Decided
Confirmed treatments
1
Flagged citations read
29 of 29
Citing cases (total)
29
Treatment dates
2012
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. United States v. Tateo still permits retrial after a conviction is set aside for trial error, but a military appellate court declined to extend that rule to a rehearing confined to one element of an offense. All 29 flagged citations have been read.
More on how this was screened

The confirmed limit is listed below. Later Supreme Court decisions continue to apply Tateo's trial-error rule; Burks v. United States separately bars retrial after reversal for insufficient evidence.

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.

29 later cases cite United States v. Tateo; 29 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 United States v. Tateo?

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 Navy-Marine Corps Court of Criminal Appeals declined to extend Tateo's retrial rule to a rehearing limited to the element of premeditation, holding that such a rehearing violated double jeopardy.

    United States v. Walker · Navy-Marine Corps Court of Criminal Appeals · filed

    In this line of jurisprudence, where the accused prevailed on appeal after trial and conviction, the Government was authorized a retrial, but the retrials were fuller proceedings than the one we have here. See, e.g., ... Tateo, 377 U.S. at 463, 84 S.Ct. 1587; ... In each of these retrials, the Government presented evidence on every element of the recharged offense. ... In the absence of any precedent supporting such a policy extension, we conclude that it does not.4 The rehearing did not, therefore, fall within the exception to the Constitution’s general prohibition against retrial after conviction. We hold that the rehearing as to the charge of the premeditated murder of LCpl Page violated the appellant’s Fifth Amendment right to be protected from Double Jeopardy.
    Read the full opinion on CourtListener →

Does this case still carry your argument?

Describe your facts. Ezel reads United States v. Tateo 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