Summary

Portrait of Warren E. Burger Warren E. Burger Price v. Georgia — Opinion of the Court

The Double Jeopardy Clause, as we have noted, is cast in terms of the risk or hazard of trial and conviction, not of the ultimate legal consequences of the verdict. To be charged and to be subjected to a second trial for first-degree murder is an ordeal not to be viewed lightly. [10] Further, and perhaps of more importance, we cannot determine whether or not the murder charge against petitioner induced the jury to find him guilty of the less serious offense of voluntary manslaughter rather than to continue to debate his innocence.
Source: Wikisource

Portrait of Warren E. Burger Warren E. Burger Price v. Georgia — Opinion of the Court

The Court ruled that federal double jeopardy standards were not applicable to the States.↑ There is a significant difference to an accused whether he is being tried for murder or manslaughter. He has reason for concern as to the consequences in terms of stigma as well as penalty. He must be prepared to meet not only the evidence of the prosecution and the verdict of the jury but the verdict of the community as well.
Source: Wikisource

Portrait of Warren E. Burger Warren E. Burger Price v. Georgia — Opinion of the Court

We asked the parties to submit post-argument memoranda directed to the question of whether petitioner can now be re-indicted or retried for voluntary manslaughter under Georgia law. These memoranda have been filed and indicate that the answer to our question appears to depend upon the construction of several Georgia statutes and on the power of Georgia courts to fashion remedial orders.
Source: Wikisource

Get perspective with Kwize: daily news enlightened by great literature