UM Bansalan LIC Logo

Parental kidnapping, criminal contempt pf court, and the double jeopardy clause: a recomendations for state courts / by Valerie Brummel

By: Material type: Continuing resourceContinuing resourceSeries: The Journal of criminal law and criminology ; Vol. 106, no. 2 (2016).Publication details: --Northwestern University: Northwestern University Press, 2016.Description: Page 315-354 29cmISSN:
  • 0081-4169
Subject(s): DDC classification:
  • BPer 364.05 J82
Summary: In state such as Illinios, courts invoke the Double Jeopardy Clause of the United States Constitution to protect parental kidnappers who have already been held in contempt of court from subsequent prosecution under state child kidnapping laws. State courts should not apply the Double Jeopardy Clause to protect parental kidnappers; instead, they should follow the example of the Ohio state courts by recognizing that contempt of court and child kidnapping are not the same crime for double jeopardy purposes.
Tags from this library: No tags from this library for this title. Log in to add tags.
Star ratings
    Average rating: 0.0 (0 votes)

In state such as Illinios, courts invoke the Double Jeopardy Clause of the United States Constitution to protect parental kidnappers who have already been held in contempt of court from subsequent prosecution under state child kidnapping laws. State courts should not apply the Double Jeopardy Clause to protect parental kidnappers; instead, they should follow the example of the Ohio state courts by recognizing that contempt of court and child kidnapping are not the same crime for double jeopardy purposes.

There are no comments on this title.

to post a comment.