Kalpana Kalpana (Editor)

Grady v. Corbin

Updated on
Edit
Like
Comment
Share on FacebookTweet on TwitterShare on LinkedInShare on Reddit
Dissent
  
O'Connor

End date
  
1990

Full case name
  
William V. Grady, District Attorney of Dutchess County v. Thomas J. Corbin

Citations
  
495 U.S. 508 (more) 110 S.Ct. 2084

Prior history
  
Certiorari to the Court of Appeals of New York

Majority
  
Brennan, joined by White, Marshall, Blackmun, Stevens

Dissent
  
Scalia, joined by Rehnquist, Kennedy

Similar
  
Blockburger v United States, Heath v Alabama, Hurtado v California, Griffin v California

Grady v. Corbin, 495 U.S. 508 (1990), was a United States Supreme Court decision holding that: "the Double Jeopardy Clause bars a subsequent prosecution if, to establish an essential element of an offense charged in that prosecution, the government will prove conduct that constitutes an offense for which the defendant has already been prosecuted."

Contents

Background

In the fall of 1987, Thomas Corbin was driving under the influence as he drove his automobile across the center line of a New York highway and collided with two oncoming vehicles. Brenda Dirago, the driver of the second vehicle, died in this accident while her husband was seriously injured. Later that same day, Corbin was charged with DUI and pleaded guilty.

Opinion of the Court

In an opinion by Justice Brennan, the Supreme Court ruled that to subsequently try him for homicide would constitute double jeopardy.

Aftermath

Grady was only valid law for three years. It was overturned by United States v. Dixon, 509 U.S. 688 (1993), which rejected the same conduct test in favor of the longstanding same element test. The same element test had been the law since Blockburger v. United States, 284 U.S. 299 (1932).

References

Grady v. Corbin Wikipedia