Skip to main content
Please enter a legal issue and/or a location
Begin typing to search, use arrow keys to navigate, use enter to select

Find a Lawyer

More Options

Yeager v. US, No. 08-67

By FindLaw Staff on June 18, 2009 | Last updated on March 21, 2019

In an appeal from the District Court's order denying an ex-Enron executive-defendant's motion to dismiss his wire fraud indictment on Double Jeopardy grounds, the order is reversed where an apparent inconsistency between a jury's verdict of acquittal on some counts and its failure to return a verdict on other counts does not affect the acquittals' preclusive force under the Double Jeopardy Clause.

Read the full decision in Yeager v. US, No. 08-67.

See the case docket.

Appellate Information:

On writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit.
Filed on June 18, 2009


Stevens, J., delivered the opinion of the Court, in which Roberts, C. J., and Souter, Ginsburg, and Breyer, JJ., joined, and in which Kennedy, J., joined as to Parts I-III and V.

Kennedy, J., filed an opinion concurring in part and concurring in the judgment.

Scalia, J., filed a dissenting opinion, in which Thomas and Alito, JJ., joined.

Alito, J., filed a dissenting opinion, in which Scalia and Thomas, JJ., joined.


For Petitioner - Samuel J. Buffone, Ropes & Gray LLP. Washington, DC.

For Respondent - Elena Kagan, Solicitor General, United States Department of Justice, Washington, DC.

You Don’t Have To Solve This on Your Own – Get a Lawyer’s Help

Meeting with a lawyer can help you understand your options and how to best protect your rights. Visit our attorney directory to find a lawyer near you who can help.

Or contact an attorney near you:
Copied to clipboard