U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit, 1967

James H. White, Jr. v. United States

U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Decided April 14, 1967 · Fahy, McGowan, Per Curiam, Tamm

377 F.2d 948; 126 U.S. App. D.C. 309; 1967 U.S. App. LEXIS 6740 (Federal Reporter, Second Series)

Counsel

Mr. Noel H. Thompson, Washington, D. C. (appointed by this court) for appellant., Mr. Arthur L. Burnett, Asst. U. S. Atty., with whom Messrs. David G. Bress, U. S. Atty., Frank Q. Nebeker and Donald S. Smith, Asst. U. S. Attys., were on the brief, for appellee.

Cases that cite this one

11 later published cases cite this decision.

State v. Braunsdorf (Wis. 1980)
United States v. Richard Victor Ponto, United States of America v. Raymond J. Grochowski (7th Cir. 1971)
John A. Hilbert, III v. The Honorable John F. Dooling, Jr., in His Capacity as United States District Judge for the Eastern District of New York (2d Cir. 1973)
United States v. John A. Liguori (2d Cir. 1970)
State v. Sessoms (N.J. Super. Ct. App. Div. 1982)
Creek v. Clark (Ill. App. Ct. 1980)
United States v. Andrew Furey (2d Cir. 1975)
United States v. Bowman (D.C. Cir. 2007)
United States v. Flemmi (District Court, D. Massachusetts 2003)
Sharoc Richardson v. Denise M. Quarles (6th Cir. 1996)
State v. Mageo (Haw. Ct. App. 1995)

This list shows which later cases cite this one. It does not say how they treated it, and no review of that has been done. Not a substitute for Shepard’s or KeyCite — verify before relying.

Opinion

PER CURIAM:

An indictment of appellant for unauthorized use of a vehicle, in violation of D.C.Code § 22-2204, was dismissed by the District Court December 9, 1965. Upon consideration of the record relating to the dismissal we conclude that it was with prejudice. Nevertheless, a few days thereafter, December 15, 1965, appellant was again indicted for the same offense. 1 His motion to dismiss the second indictment due to the bar created by the earlier dismissal with prejudice was denied. We think it should have been granted. The dismissal with prejudice constituted an adjudication which barred another prosecution for the same offense. United States v. Oppenheimer, 242 U.S. 85, 37 S. Ct. 68, 61 L.Ed. 161; District of Columbia v. Weams, 208 A.2d 617, 619 (D.C. Mun.App.). Appellant’s conviction under the second indictment, now before us on this appeal, accordingly must be set aside and the case remanded for dismissal of that indictment.

It is so ordered.

. See Mann v. United States, 113 U.S.App.D.C. 27, 304 F.2d 394, where dismissal of the indictment was granted explicitly without prejudice and reindictment was held proper.

Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.