Baxstrom v. Herold

This article's factual accuracy is disputed. Relevant discussion may be found on the talk page. Please help to ensure that disputed statements are reliably sourced. (February 2021) (Learn how and when to remove this message)

Baxstrom v. Herold
Supreme Court of the United States
Argued December 9, 1965 Decided February 23, 1966
Full case name	Baxstrom v. Herold, State Hospital Director
Citations	383 U.S. 107 (more) 86 S. Ct. 760; 15 L. Ed. 2d 620; 1966 U.S. LEXIS 2214
Holding
Civil commitment following a prison term does not constitute an unconstitutional double jeopardy.
Court membership
Chief Justice Earl Warren Associate Justices Hugo Black · William O. Douglas Tom C. Clark · John M. Harlan II William J. Brennan Jr. · Potter Stewart Byron White · Abe Fortas
Case opinions
Majority	Warren, joined by Douglas, Clark, Harlan, Brennan, Stewart, White, Fortas
Concurrence	Black (in judgment)

Wikisource has original text related to this article:

Baxstrom v. Herold

Baxstrom v. Herold, 383 U.S. 107 (1966), was a case decided by the Supreme Court of the United States that held that civil commitment following a prison term does not run afoul of double jeopardy principles.^[1]

• Full text of the opinion from Justia.com

This article related to the Supreme Court of the United States is a stub. You can help Wikipedia by expanding it.

• v
• t
• e