From our private database of 33,600+ case briefs...
United States v. Dinitz
United States Supreme Court
424 U.S. 600 (1976)
Nathan Dinitz (defendant) was tried on drug charges. Dinitz’s new attorney, Maurice Wagner, was admitted pro hac vice. Wagner was warned repeatedly for making improper opening statements. In response, the judge said that the case could be stayed while a higher court considered Wagner’s expulsion, Dinitz could use his old attorney, or a mistrial could be declared. Dinitz moved for a mistrial. The prosecution did not object, and the judge granted the motion. Before retrial, Dinitz moved to dismiss claiming that the Double Jeopardy Clause barred prosecution. The trial court denied the motion. On appeal, the court found that the judge had essentially forced Dinitz to move for a mistrial and proceeded as if the mistrial had been declared over Dinitz’s objections. The appellate court determined there was no manifest necessity for Wagner’s expulsion and the Double Jeopardy Clause barred retrial. The United States Supreme Court granted certiorari.
Rule of Law
Holding and Reasoning (Stewart, J.)
Concurrence (Burger, C.J.)
Dissent (Brennan, J.)
What to do next…
Unlock this case brief with a free (no-commitment) trial membership of Quimbee.
You’ll be in good company: Quimbee is one of the most widely used and trusted sites for law students, serving more than 602,000 law students since 2011. Some law schools—such as Yale, Berkeley, and Northwestern—even subscribe directly to Quimbee for all their law students.Unlock this case briefRead our student testimonials
Learn more about Quimbee’s unique (and proven) approach to achieving great grades at law school.
Quimbee is a company hell-bent on one thing: helping you get an “A” in every course you take in law school, so you can graduate at the top of your class and get a high-paying law job. We’re not just a study aid for law students; we’re the study aid for law students.Learn about our approachRead more about Quimbee
Here's why 602,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 33,600 briefs, keyed to 984 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
- The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
- Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
- Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.