Abstract
In the landmark decision of United States v. DiFrancesco, the Supreme Court, in a five-to-four decision, reversed the Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit, and held that the appeal provision of 18 U.S.C. § 3576 (1976) did not violate the double jeopardy clause of the fifth amendment. This Note analyzes the DiFrancesco decision in the context of double jeopardy law and discusses the decision's effect on double jeopardy principles. This note also suggests that the majority opinion in DiFrancesco, ignoring as it does the tradition of double jeopardy protection, was not a completely satisfactory response to the issues facing the Court and will have a restrictive effect on the American system of individualized sentencing.
Recommended Citation
David M. Lofholm,
Double Jeopardy: Government Appeals of Sentences: United States v. DiFrancesco, 449 U.S. 117 (1980),
60 Neb. L. Rev.
(1981)
Available at: https://digitalcommons.unl.edu/nlr/vol60/iss4/7