Opinion · Supreme Court of the United States

Hongkong & Shanghai Banking Corp. v. Hoopa Valley Tribe

513 U.S. 1059

Type
Opinion
Court
Supreme Court of the United States
Jurisdiction
Federal
Date
1994-12-12
Topic
general

How later courts describe this case

  • concluding that jeopardy attaches “when the case is first presented to the trier of fact”
  • stating that in civil cases jeopardy attaches “when evidence is first presented to the trier of fact in a proceeding seeking to impose a penalty for crime.”
  • observing that, “[w]hen on-reservation conduct involves both Indians and non-Indians, we must undertake a particularized inquiry into the state, federal, and tribal interests at stake”
  • noting that forfeiture and civil fines can be penalties and noting that after Austin and Kurth Ranch the government should be aware of the "hazards” of commencing separate criminal prosecutions and civil forfeiture proceedings
  • jeopardy does not attach to judicial forfeiture proceeding until evidence is presented to the trier of fact
  • defendant cannot be placed in jeopardy if he has not appeared as a party in a proceeding; there having been no prior jeopardy, double jeopardy cannot apply

Citator

UpLaw has not yet analyzed Hongkong & Shanghai Banking Corp. v. Hoopa Valley Tribe. The absence of a flag is not a finding that it is good law.

Cited by
122 opinions

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit denied.