Goodwin (D) was charged with a misdemeanor and given a trial date. D fled the jurisdiction. D was later found, and then charged with a felony based on the same facts. D was convicted of the felony. D moved to set the verdict aside on the ground of prosecutorial vindictiveness, claiming that the felony charge gave rise to an impermissible appearance of retaliation. The District Court denied the motion. The Court of Appeals reversed, stating that there was a presumption of vindictiveness unless the government (P) comes forward with objective evidence. P appealed.

This section contains the nature of the case and procedural background.

The legal issues presented in this case will be displayed here.

The court's holding and decision will be displayed here.

Legal analysis from Dean's Law Dictionary will be displayed here.