000			01350nas a22002417a 4500
999			_c4371 _d4371
003			OSt
005			20200302164255.0
008			170812b xxuqr|p| |||| 00| 0 eng d
022			_a0081-4169
040			_cUM Bansalan College LIC
082			_aBPer 364.05 _bJ82
100			_96055 _aBrummel, Valerie.
245			_aParental kidnapping, criminal contempt pf court, and the double jeopardy clause: _ba recomendations for state courts / _cby Valerie Brummel
260			_a--Northwestern University: _bNorthwestern University Press, _c2016.
300			_aPage 315-354 _c29cm.
310			_aQuarterly
362			_aVol. 106, no. 2 (2016).
440			_95698 _aThe Journal of criminal law and criminology. _vVol. 106, no. 2 (2016). _x0091-4169
520			_aIn 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.
650			_aCourts _914516
650		0	_aCriminal law _99728
942			_2ddc _cBPER.