FindLaw Caselaw United States US Supreme Court UNITED STATES v GOODWIN UNITED STATES v GOODWIN A A Font size United States Supreme Court UNITED STATES v GOODWIN 1982 No 802195 Argued April 21 1982 Decided June 18 1982 After initially expressing an interest in plea bargaining on misdemeanor charges respondent decided not to plead guilty and requested a trial by jury While the misdemeanor charges were still pending he was indicted and convicted in Federal District Court on a felony charge arising out of the same incident as the misdemeanor charges Respondent moved to set aside the verdict on the ground of prosecutorial vindictiveness contending that the felony indictment gave rise to an impermissible appearance of retaliation The District Court denied the motion The Court of Appeals reversed holding that although the prosecutor did not act with actual Held A presumption of prosecutorial vindictiveness was not warranted in this case and absent such a presumption no due process violation was established Pp 372384 a In cases in which action detrimental to a defendant has been taken after the exercise of a legal right the presumption of an improper vindictive motive has been applied only where a reasonable likelihood of vindictiveness existed North Carolina v Pearce 395 US 711 Blackledge v Perry 417 US 21 Cf Bordenkircher v Hayes 434 US 357 Pp 372380 b A change in the prosecutors charging decision made after an initial trial is completed is much more likely to be improperly motivated than is a pretrial decision It is unrealistic to assume that a prosecutors probable response to such pretrial motions as to be tried by a jury is to seek to penalize and to deter Here the timing of the prosecutors action suggests that a presumption of vindictiveness was not warranted A prosecutor should remain free before trial to exercise his discretion to determine the extent of the societal interest in the prosecution The initial 457 US 368 369 charges filed by a prosecutor may not reflect the extent to which an individual is legitimately subject to prosecution Bordenkircher supra Pp 380382 c The nature of the right asserted by respondent confirms that a presumption of vindictiveness was not warranted in this case The mere fact that a defendant refuses to plead guilty and forces the government to prove its case is insufficient to warrant a presumption that subsequent changes in the charging decision are unwarranted Bordenkircher supra Pp 382383 d The fact that respondent as opposed to having a bench trial requested a jury trial does not compel a special presumption of prosecutorial vindictiveness whenever additional charges are thereafter brought While there may have been an opportunity for vindictiveness here a mere opportunity for vindictiveness is insufficient to justify the imposition of a prophylactic rule The possibility that a prosecutor would respond to a defendants pretrial demand for a jury trial by bringing charges not in the public interest that could be explained only as a penalty imposed on the defendant is so unlikely that a presumption of vindictiveness 637 F2d 250 reversed and remanded STEVENS J delivered the opinion of the Court in which BURGER C J and WHITE POWELL REHNQUIST and OCONNOR JJ joined BLACKMUN J filed an opinion concurring in the judgment post at 385 BRENNAN J filed a dissenting opinion in which MARSHALL J joined post at 386 Deputy Solicitor General Frey argued the cause for the United States With him on the briefs were Solicitor General Lee Assistant Attorney General Jensen Deputy Solicitor General Shapiro and Robert J Erickson Paul W Spence by appointment of the Court 454 US 1138 argued the cause and filed a brief for respondent JUSTICE STEVENS delivered the opinion of the Court This case involves presumptions The question presented is whether a presumption that has been used to evaluate a judicial or prosecutorial response to a criminal defendants exercise of a right to be retried after he has been convicted 457 US 368 370 should also be applied to evaluate a prosecutors pretrial response to a defendants demand for a jury trial After the respondent requested a trial by jury on pending misdemeanor charges he was indicted and convicted on a felony charge Believing that the sequence of events gave rise to an impermissible appearance of prosecutorial retaliation against the defendants exercise of his right to be tried by jury the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit reversed the felony conviction 637 F2d 250 Because this case presents an important question concerning the scope of our holdings in North Carolina v Pearce 395 US 711 and Blackledge v Perry 417 US 21 we granted the Governments petition for certiorari 454 US 1079 I Respondent Goodwin was stopped for speeding by a United States Park Policeman on the BaltimoreWashington Parkway Goodwin emerged from his car to talk to the policeman After a brief discussion the officer noticed a clear plastic bag underneath the armrest next to the drivers seat of Goodwins car The officer asked Goodwin to return to his car and to raise the armrest Respondent did so but as he raised the armrest he placed the car into gear and accelerated rapidly The car struck the officer knocking him first onto the back of the car and then onto the highway The The following day the officer filed a complaint in the District Court charging respondent with several misdemeanor and petty offenses including assault Goodwin was arrested and arraigned before a United States Magistrate The Magistrate set a date for trial but respondent fled the jurisdiction Three years later Goodwin was found in custody in Virginia and was returned to Maryland Upon his return respondents case was assigned to an attorney from the Department of Justice who was detailed 457 US 368 371 temporarily to try petty crime and misdemeanor cases before the Magistrate The attorney did not have authority to try felony cases or to seek indictments from the grand jury Respondent initiated plea negotiations with the prosecutor but later advised the Government that he did not wish to plead guilty and desired a trial by jury in the District Court 1 The case was transferred to the District Court and responsibility for the prosecution was assumed by an Assistant United States Attorney Approximately six weeks later after reviewing the case and discussing it with several parties the prosecutor obtained a fourcount indictment charging respondent with one felony count of forcibly assaulting a federal officer and three related counts arising from the same incident 2 A jury convicted respondent on the felony count and on one misdemeanor count Respondent moved to set aside the verdict on the ground of prosecutorial vindictiveness contending that the indictment on the felony charge gave rise to an impermissible appearance of retaliation The District Court denied the motion finding that the prosecutor in this case has adequately dispelled any appearance of retaliatory intent 3 457 US 368 372 Although the Court of Appeals readily concluded that the prosecutor did not act with actual vindictiveness in seeking a felony indictment 637 F2d at 252 it nevertheless reversed Relying on our decisions in North Carolina v Pearce supra and Blackledge v Perry supra the court held that the Due Process Clause of the Fifth Amendment prohibits the Government from bringing more serious charges against a defendant after he has invoked his right to a jury trial unless the prosecutor comes forward with objective evidence to show that the increased charges could not have been brought before the defendant exercised his II To punish a person because he has done what the law plainly allows him to do is a due process violation of the most basic sort Bordenkircher v Hayes 434 US 357 363 In a series of cases beginning with North Carolina v Pearce and culminating in Bordenkircher v Hayes the Court has recognized this basic and itself uncontroversial principle For while an individual certainly may be penalized for violating the law he just as certainly may not be punished for exercising a protected statutory or constitutional right 4 The imposition of punishment is the very purpose of virtually all criminal proceedings The presence of a punitive 457 US 368 373 motivation therefore does not provide an adequate basis for distinguishing governmental action that is fully justified as a legitimate response to perceived criminal conduct from governmental action that is an impermissible response to noncriminal protected activity Motives are complex and difficult to prove As a result in certain cases in which action detrimental to the defendant has been taken after the exercise of a legal right the Court has found it necessary to presume an improper vindictive motive Given the severity of such a presumption however which may operate in the absence of any proof of an improper motive and In North Carolina v Pearce the Court held that neither the Double Jeopardy Clause nor the Equal Protection Clause prohibits a trial judge from imposing a harsher sentence on retrial after a criminal defendant successfully attacks an initial conviction on appeal The Court stated however that it can hardly be doubted that it would be a flagrant violation of the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment for a state trial court to follow an announced practice of imposing a heavier sentence upon every reconvicted defendant for the explicit purpose of punishing the defendant for his having succeeded in getting 395 US at 723 724 The Court continued Due process of law then requires that vindictiveness against a defendant for having successfully attacked his first conviction must play no part in the sentence he receives after a new trial And since the fear of such vindictiveness may unconstitutionally deter a defendants exercise of the right to appeal or collaterally attack his first conviction due process also requires that a defendant be freed of apprehension of such a retaliatory 457 US 368 374 motivation on the part of the sentencing judge Id at 725 In order to assure the absence of such a motivation the Court concluded Whenever a judge imposes a more severe sentence upon a defendant after a new trial the reasons for his doing so must affirmatively appear Those reasons must be based upon objective information concerning identifiable conduct on the part of the defendant occurring after the time of the original sentencing proceeding And the factual data upon which the increased sentence is based must be made part of the record so that the constitutional legitimacy of the increased sentence may be fully reviewed on appeal Id at 726 In sum the Court applied a presumption of vindictiveness which may be overcome only by objective information in the record justifying the increased sentence 5 457 US 368 375 In Blackledge v Perry 417 US 21 the Court confronted the problem of increased punishment upon retrial after appeal in a setting different from that considered in Pearce Perry was convicted of assault in an inferior court having exclusive jurisdiction for the trial of misdemeanors The court imposed a 6month sentence Under North Carolina law Perry had an absolute right to a trial de novo in the Superior Court which possessed felony jurisdiction After Perry filed his notice of appeal the prosecutor obtained a felony indictment charging him with assault with a deadly weapon Perry pleaded guilty to the felony and was sentenced to a term of In reviewing Perrys felony conviction and increased sentence 6 this Court first stated the essence of the holdings in Pearce and the cases that had followed it The lesson that emerges from Pearce Colten and Chaffin is that the Due Process Clause is not offended by all possibilities of increased punishment upon retrial after appeal but only by those that pose a realistic likelihood of vindictiveness 417 US at 27 The Court held that the opportunities for vindictiveness in the situation before it were such as to impel the conclusion that due process of law requires a rule analogous to that of the Pearce case Ibid It explained 457 US 368 376 A prosecutor clearly has a considerable stake in discouraging convicted misdemeanants from appealing and thus obtaining a trial de novo in the Superior Court since such an appeal will clearly require increased expenditures of prosecutorial resources before the defendants conviction becomes final and may even result in a formerly convicted defendants going free And if the prosecutor has the means readily at hand to discourage such appeals by upping the ante through a felony indictment whenever a convicted misdemeanant pursues his statutory appellate remedy the State can insure that only the most hardy defendants will brave the hazards of a The Court emphasized in Blackledge that it did not matter that no evidence was present that the prosecutor had acted in bad faith or with malice in seeking the felony indictment 7 As in Pearce the Court held that the likelihood of vindictiveness justified a presumption that would free defendants of apprehension of such a retaliatory motivation on the part of the prosecutor 8 Both Pearce and Blackledge involved the defendants exercise of a procedural right that caused a complete retrial after he had been once tried and convicted The decisions in these cases reflect a recognition by the Court of the institutional bias inherent in the judicial system against the retrial of issues that have already been decided The doctrines of stare decisis res judicata the law of the case and double jeopardy all are based at least in part on that deepseated bias 457 US 368 377 While none of these doctrines barred the retrials in Pearce and Blackledge the same institutional pressure that supports them might also subconsciously motivate a vindictive prosecutorial or judicial response to a defendants exercise of his right to obtain a retrial of a decided question In Bordenkircher v Hayes 434 US 357 the Court for the first time considered an allegation of vindictiveness that arose in a pretrial setting In that case the Court held that the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment did not prohibit a prosecutor from carrying out a threat made during plea negotiations to bring additional charges against an accused who refused to plead guilty to the offense with which he was originally charged The prosecutor in that case had explicitly told the defendant that if he did not plead guilty and save the court the inconvenience and necessity of a trial he would return to the 9 The defendant refused to plead guilty and the prosecutor obtained the indictment It was not disputed that the additional charge was justified by the evidence that the prosecutor was in possession of this evidence at the time the original indictment was obtained and that the prosecutor sought the additional charge because of the accuseds refusal to plead guilty to the original charge In finding no due process violation the Court in Bordenkircher considered the decisions in Pearce and Blackledge and stated In those cases the Court was dealing with the States unilateral imposition of a penalty upon a defendant who had chosen to exercise a legal right to attack his original conviction a situation very different from the giveandtake 457 US 368 378 negotiation common in plea bargaining between the prosecution and defense which arguably possess relatively equal bargaining power Parker v North Carolina 397 US 790 809 opinion of BRENNAN J 434 US at 362 The Court stated that the due process violation in Pearce and Blackledge lay not in the possibility that a defendant might be deterred from the exercise of a legal right but rather in the danger that the State might be retaliating against the accused for lawfully attacking his conviction 434 US at 363 The Court held however that there was no such element of punishment in the giveandtake of plea negotiation so long as the accused is free to accept or reject the prosecutions offer Ibid The Court noted that by tolerating and encouraging the negotiation of pleas this Court had accepted as constitutionally legitimate the simple reality that the prosecutors interest at the bargaining table is to persuade the defendant to forgo his constitutional right to stand trial The Court concluded We hold only that the course of conduct engaged in by the prosecutor in this case which no more than openly presented the defendant with the unpleasant alternatives of forgoing trial or facing charges on which he was plainly subject to prosecution did not violate the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment Id at 365 The outcome in Bordenkircher was mandated by this Courts acceptance of plea negotiation as a legitimate process 10 In declining to apply a presumption of vindictiveness 457 US 368 379 the Court recognized that additional charges obtained by a prosecutor could not necessarily be characterized as an impermissible penalty Since charges brought in an original indictment may be abandoned by the prosecutor in the course of plea negotiation in often what is clearly a benefit to the defendant changes in the charging decision that occur in the 457 US 368 380 context of plea negotiation are an inaccurate measure of improper prosecutorial vindictiveness 11 An initial indictment from which the prosecutor embarks on a course of plea negotiation does not necessarily define the extent of the legitimate interest in prosecution For just as a prosecutor may forgo legitimate charges already brought in an effort to save the time and expense of trial a prosecutor may file additional charges if an initial expectation that a defendant would plead guilty to lesser charges proves unfounded 12 III This case like Bordenkircher arises from a pretrial decision to modify the charges against the defendant Unlike Bordenkircher however there is no evidence in this case that could give rise to a claim of actual vindictiveness the 457 US 368 381 prosecutor never suggested that the charge was brought to influence the respondents conduct 13 The conviction in this case may be reversed only if a presumption of vindictiveness applicable in all cases is warranted There is good reason to be cautious before adopting an inflexible presumption of prosecutorial vindictiveness in a pretrial setting In the course of preparing a case for trial the prosecutor may uncover additional information that suggests a basis for further prosecution or he simply may come to realize that information possessed by the State has a broader significance At this stage of the proceedings the prosecutors assessment of the proper extent of prosecution may not have crystallized In contrast once a trial begins and certainly by the time a conviction has been obtained it is much more likely that the In addition a defendant before trial is expected to invoke procedural rights that inevitably impose some burden on the prosecutor Defense counsel routinely file pretrial motions to suppress evidence to challenge the sufficiency and form of an indictment to plead an affirmative defense to request psychiatric services to obtain access to government files to be tried by jury It is unrealistic to assume that a prosecutors probable response to such motions is to seek to penalize and to deter The invocation of procedural rights is an integral part of the adversary process in which our criminal justice system operates Thus the timing of the prosecutors action in this case suggests that a presumption of vindictiveness is not warranted 457 US 368 382 A prosecutor should remain free before trial to exercise the broad discretion entrusted to him to determine the extent of the societal interest in prosecution An initial decision should not freeze future conduct 14 As we made clear in Bordenkircher the initial charges filed by a prosecutor may not reflect the extent to which an individual is legitimately subject to prosecution 15 The nature of the right asserted by the respondent confirms that a presumption of vindictiveness is not warranted in this case After initially expressing an interest in plea negotiation respondent decided not to plead guilty and requested a trial by jury in District Court In doing so he forced the Government to bear the burdens and uncertainty of a trial This Court in Bordenkircher made clear that the mere fact that a defendant refuses to plead guilty and forces the government to prove its case is insufficient to warrant a presumption that subsequent changes in the charging decision 457 US 368 383 are unjustified Respondent argues that such a presumption is warranted in this case however because he not only requested a trial he requested a trial by jury We can not agree The distinction between a bench trial and a jury trial does not compel a special presumption of prosecutorial vindictiveness whenever additional charges are brought after a jury is demanded To be sure a jury trial is more burdensome than a bench trial The defendant may challenge the selection of the venire the jury itself must be impaneled witnesses and arguments must be prepared more carefully to avoid the danger of a mistrial These matters are much less significant however than the facts that before either a jury or a judge the State must present its full 16 A prosecutor has no personal stake in a bench trial and thus no reason to engage in selfvindication upon a defendants request for a jury trial 17 Perhaps most importantly the institutional bias against the retrial of a decided question that supported the decisions in Pearce and Blackledge simply has no counterpart in this case 18 457 US 368 384 There is an opportunity for vindictiveness as there was in Colten and Chaffin Those cases demonstrate however that a mere opportunity for vindictiveness is insufficient to justify the imposition of a prophylactic rule As Blackledge makes clear the Due Process Clause is not offended by all possibilities of increased punishment but only by those that pose a realistic likelihood of vindictiveness 417 US at 27 The possibility that a prosecutor would respond to a defendants pretrial demand for a jury trial by bringing charges not in the public interest that could be explained only as a penalty imposed on the defendant is so unlikely that a presumption of vindictiveness certainly is not warranted IV In declining to apply a presumption of vindictiveness we of course do not foreclose the possibility that a defendant in an appropriate case might prove objectively that the prosecutors charging decision was motivated by a desire to punish him for doing something that the law plainly allowed him to do 19 In this case however the Court of Appeals stated On this record we readily conclude that the prosecutor did not act with actual vindictiveness in seeking a felony indictment 637 F2d at 252 Respondent does not challenge that finding Absent a presumption of vindictiveness no due process violation has been established The judgment of the Court of Appeals is reversed The 457 US 368 385 case is remanded for further proceedings consistent with this opinion It is so ordered Footnotes Footnote 1 At that time there was no statutory provision allowing a trial by jury before a magistrate Footnote 2 By affidavit the Assistant United States Attorney later set forth his reasons for this action 1 he considered respondents conduct on the date in question to be a serious violation of law 2 respondent had a lengthy history of violent crime 3 the prosecutor considered respondents conduct to be related to major narcotics transactions 4 the prosecutor believed that respondent had committed perjury at his preliminary hearing and 5 respondent had failed to appear for trial as originally scheduled The Government attorney stated that his decision to seek a felony indictment was not motivated in any way by Goodwins request Footnote 3 App to Pet for Cert 22a cf n 2 supra The District Court considered the merits of respondents motion even though it was not timely filed in accordance with Rule 12b1 of the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure The District Court found sufficient cause for respondents procedural default pursuant to Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 12f The 457 US 368 372 Court of Appeals did not consider the propriety of the District Courts ruling in this regard and neither do we Footnote 4 For an agent of the State to pursue a course of action whose objective is to penalize a persons reliance on his legal rights is patently unconstitutional Bordenkircher v Hayes 434 US 357 363 quoting Chaffin v Stynchcombe 412 US 17 32 33 n 20 Footnote 5 Two subsequent cases developed the principles set forth in Pearce In Colten v Kentucky 407 US 104 the Court refused to apply the prophylactic rule of Pearce to an allegation of vindictiveness that arose in a case involving Kentuckys twotier system for adjudicating less serious criminal charges In that system a defendant who is convicted and sentenced in an inferior court is entitled to a trial de novo in a court of general jurisdiction The defendant in Colten exercised that right and received a more severe sentence from the court of general jurisdiction This Court found that the possibility of vindictiveness found to exist in Pearce is not inherent in the Kentucky twotier system 407 US at 116 The Court emphasized that the second trial was conducted and the final sentence was imposed by a different court that was not asked to do over what it thought it had already done correctly Id at 117 The Court noted It may often be that the superior court will impose a punishment more severe than that received from an inferior court But it no more follows that such a sentence is a vindictive penalty for seeking a superior court trial than that the inferior court imposed a lenient penalty Ibid Ultimately the Court described the sentence received from the inferior In Chaffin v Stynchcombe 412 US 17 the Court held that the prophylactic rule of Pearce does not apply when the second sentence is 457 US 368 375 imposed on retrial by a jury The Court emphasized that the decision in Pearce was premised on the apparent need to guard against vindictiveness in the resentencing process 412 US at 25 emphasis in original The Court found that the possibility of vindictiveness was de minimis when resentencing was by jury in a properly controlled retrial The Court noted that 1 the jury typically will not be aware of the prior sentence 2 the jury unlike a judge who has been reversed will have no personal stake in the prior conviction and no motivation to engage in selfvindication and 3 the jury will not likely be sensitive to the institutional interests that might occasion higher sentences by a judge desirous of discouraging what he regards as meritless appeals Id at 2627 Footnote 6 The Court held that in pleading guilty Perry had not waived the right not to be haled into court at all upon the felony charge 417 US at 30 Footnote 7 There is of course no evidence that the prosecutor in this case acted in bad faith or maliciously in seeking a felony indictment against Perry Id at 28 Footnote 8 The presumption again could be overcome by objective evidence justifying the prosecutors action The Court noted This would clearly be a different case if the State had shown that it was impossible to proceed on the more serious charge at the outset as in Diaz v United States 223 US 442 Id at 29 n 7 Footnote 9 The prosecutor advised the defendant that he would obtain an indictment under the Kentucky Habitual Criminal Act which would subject the accused to a mandatory sentence of life imprisonment by reason of his two prior felony convictions Absent the additional indictment the defendant was subject to a punishment of 2 to 10 years in prison Footnote 10 Cf 434 US at 364 365 To hold that the prosecutors desire to induce a guilty plea may play no part in his charging decision would contradict the very premises that underlie the concept of plea bargaining itself If a prosecutor could not threaten to bring additional charges 457 US 368 379 during plea negotiation and then obtain those charges when plea negotiation failed an equally compelling argument could be made that a prosecutors initial charging decision could never be influenced by what he hoped to gain in the course of plea negotiation Whether additional charges were brought originally and dismissed or merely threatened during plea negotiations the prosecutor could be accused of using those charges to induce a defendant to forgo his right to stand trial If such use of additional charges were presumptively invalid the institution of plea negotiation could not survive Thus to preserve the plea negotiation process with The decision in Bordenkircher also was influenced by the fact that had the Court recognized a distinction of constitutional dimension between the dismissal of charges brought in an original indictment and the addition of charges after plea negotiation the aggressive prosecutor would merely be prompted to bring the greater charge initially in every case and only thereafter to bargain Id at 368 BLACKMUN J dissenting The consequences of such a decision often would be prejudicial to defendants for an accused would bargain against a greater charge face the likelihood of increased bail and run the risk that the court would Footnote 11 The Court in Bordenkircher stated that the validity of a pretrial charging decision must be measured against the broad discretion held by the prosecutor to select the charges against an accused Within the limits set by the legislatures constitutionally valid definition of chargeable offenses the conscious exercise of some selectivity in enforcement is not itself a federal constitutional violation so long as the selection was not deliberately based upon an unjustifiable standard such as race religion or other arbitrary classification Id at 364 quoting Oyler v Boles 368 US 448 456 A charging decision does not levy an improper penalty unless it results solely from the defendants exercise of a protected legal right rather than the prosecutors normal assessment of the societal interest in prosecution See Westen Westin A Constitutional Law of Remedies for Broken Plea Bargains 66 Calif L Rev 471 486 1978 Footnote 12 In rejecting a presumption of vindictiveness the Court in Bordenkircher did not foreclose the possibility that a defendant might prove through objective evidence an improper prosecutorial motive In the case before it however the Court did not find such proof in the fact that the prosecutor had stated explicitly that additional charges were brought to persuade the defendant to plead guilty The fact that the prosecutor threatened the defendant did not prove that the action threatened was not permissible the prosecutors conduct did not establish that the additional charges were brought solely to penalize the defendant and could not be Footnote 13 See n 12 supra Footnote 14 We recognize that prosecutors may be trained to bring all legitimate charges against an individual at the outset Certainly a prosecutor should not file any charge until he has investigated fully all of the circumstances surrounding a case To presume that every case is complete at the time an initial charge is filed however is to presume that every prosecutor is infallible an assumption that would ignore the practical restraints imposed by often limited prosecutorial resources Moreover there are certain advantages in avoiding a rule that would compel prosecutors to attempt to place every conceivable charge against an individual on Footnote 15 Respondent argues that the Courts refusal to presume vindictiveness in Bordenkircher is not controlling in this case because he had refused to plead guilty and the plea negotiation process was over Respondents argument is not strengthened however by the fact that the additional charge in this case was brought outside the context of plea negotiation The fact that the increased charge in Bordenkircher was brought after a warning made during plea negotiation was the principal basis for the defendants claim that the charge was an unjustified response to his legal right to stand trial But cf n 12 supra Respondents Footnote 16 Cf Colten v Kentucky 407 US at 117 Footnote 17 Cf Chaffin v Stynchcombe 412 US at 27 Footnote 18 Indeed there is a strong tradition in this country in favor of jury trials despite the additional burdens that they entail for all parties In many cases and for many reasons both the judge and the prosecutor may prefer to have a case tried by jury See e g Vines v Muncy 553 F2d 342 CA4 1977 United States v Morlang 531 F2d 183 CA4 1975 United States v Ceja 451 F2d 399 CA1 1971 see also Fed Rule Crim Proc 23a In Singer v United States 380 US 24 this Court held that a criminal defendant does not have a constitutional right to waive a jury trial and to have his case tried before a judge alone The Court stated Trial by jury has been established by the Constitution as the normal and 457 US 368 384 preferable mode of disposing of issues of fact in criminal cases Patton v United States 281 US 276 312 Id at 35 Footnote 19 As the Government states in its brief Accordingly while the prosecutors charging decision is presumptively lawful and the prosecutor is not required to sustain any burden of justification for an increase in charges the defendant is free to tender evidence to the court to support a claim that enhanced charges are a direct and unjustifiable penalty for the exercise of a procedural right Of course only in a rare case would a defendant be able to overcome the presumptive validity of the prosecutors actions through such a demonstration Brief for United States 28 n 9 JUSTICE BLACKMUN concurring in the judgment Like JUSTICE BRENNAN I believe that our precedents mandate the conclusion that a realistic likelihood of vindictiveness arises in this context Blackledge v Perry 417 US 21 27 1974 The Assistant United States Attorney responsible for increasing the charges against respondent was aware of the initial charging decision he had the means available to discourage respondent from electing a jury trial in District Court he had a substantial stake in dissuading respondent from exercising that option and he was familiar with and sensitive to the institutional interests that favored a trial before the Magistrate Moreover I find no support in our prior cases for any distinction between pretrial and posttrial vindictiveness As I have said before Prosecutorial vindictiveness in any context is still prosecutorial vindictiveness The Due Process Clause should protect an accused against it however it asserts itself Bordenkircher v Hayes 434 US 357 368 1978 dissenting opinion And as JUSTICE BRENNAN points out Bordenkircher does not dictate the result here In fact in Bordenkircher the Court expressly distinguished and left unresolved cases such as this one where the prosecutor without notice brought an additional and more serious charge after plea negotiations relating only to the original charges had ended with the defendants insistence on pleading not guilty Id at 360 The Courts ruling in Bordenkircher did not depend on a distinction between the pretrial and posttrial settings rather the Court declined to apply its prior opinions in Blackledge and North Carolina v Pearce 395 US 711 1969 because those cases involved the States unilateral imposition of a penalty rather than the giveandtake negotiation common in plea bargaining 434 US at 457 US 368 386 362 quoting Parker v North Carolina 397 US 790 809 1970 opinion of BRENNAN J Here as in Pearce and Blackledge the prosecutor unilaterally imposed a penalty in response to respondents exercise of a legal right Adopting the prophylactic rule of Pearce and Blackledge in this case will not as the Court would insist undercut the broad discretion entrusted to the prosecutor to determine the extent of the societal interest in prosecution Ante at 382 The prosecutor initially makes a discretionary determination that the interests of the state are served by not seeking more serious charges Bordenkircher v Hayes 434 US at 367 dissenting opinion quoting Hayes v Cowan 547 F2d 42 44 CA6 1976 Moreover the Due Process Clause does not deprive a prosecutor of the flexibility to add charges after a defendant has decided not to plead guilty and has elected a jury trial in District Court so long as the adjustment is based on objective information concerning identifiable conduct on the part of the defendant occurring after the time of the original charging decision North Carolina v Pearce 395 US at 726 In addition I believe that the prosecutor adequately explains an increased charge by pointing to objective information that he could not reasonably have been aware of at the time charges were initially filed Cf ante at 381 Because I find that the Assistant United States Attorneys explanation for seeking a felony indictment satisfies these standards see ante at 371 n 2 I conclude that the Government has dispelled the appearance of vindictiveness and therefore that the imposition of additional charges did not violate respondents due process rights Accordingly I concur in the judgment JUSTICE BRENNAN with whom JUSTICE MARSHALL joins dissenting In Blackledge v Perry 417 US 21 1974 this Court held that the Due Process Clause prohibits a prosecutor from responding 457 US 368 387 to the defendants invocation of his statutory right to a trial de novo by bringing more serious charges against him that arise out of the same conduct In the case before us the prosecutor responded to the defendants invocation of his statutory and constitutional right to a trial by jury by raising petty offenses to felony charges based on the same conduct Yet the Court holds in the teeth of Blackledge that here there is no denial of due process In my view Blackledge requires affirmance of the Court of Appeals and the Courts attempt to distinguish that case from The salient facts of this case are quite simple Respondent was originally charged with several petty offenses and misdemeanors speeding reckless driving failing to give aid at the scene of an accident fleeing from a police officer and assault by striking a police officer arising from his conduct on the BaltimoreWashington Parkway Assuming that respondent had been convicted on every count charged in this original complaint the maximum punishment to which he conceivably could have been exposed was fines of 3500 and 28 months in prison 1 Because all of the charges against respondent were petty offenses or misdemeanors they were scheduled for trial before a magistrate see 28 USC 636a 3 18 USC 3401a who was not authorized to 457 US 368 388 conduct jury trials see ante at 371 n 1 In addition the case was assigned to a prosecutor who owing to inexperience was not even authorized to try felony cases Thus the Government recognized that respondents alleged crimes were relatively minor and attempted to dispose of them in an expedited manner But respondent frustrated this attempt at summary justice by demanding a jury trial in Federal District Court This was his right of course not only under the applicable statute 18 USC 3401b but also under the Constitution 2 Respondents demand required that the case be transferred from the Magistrates Court in Hyattsville to the District Court in Baltimore and that the prosecution be reassigned to an Assistant United States Attorney who was authorized to prosecute cases in the District Court The new prosecutor sought and obtained a second fourcount indictment in which the same conduct originally charged as pettyoffense and misdemeanor counts was now charged as a misdemeanor and two felonies assaulting resisting or impeding a federal officer with a deadly weapon and assault with a dangerous weapon If we assume as before that respondent was convicted on 3 Respondents claim below was that such 457 US 368 389 an elevation of the charges against him from petty offenses to felonies following his exercise of his statutory and constitutional right to a jury trial reflected prosecutorial vindictiveness that denied him due process of law The Court attempts to denigrate respondents claim by asserting that this case involves presumptions ante at 369 and by arguing that there is no evidence in this case that could give rise to a claim of actual vindictiveness ante at 380 emphasis in original By casting respondents claim in terms of a mere legal presumption the Court hopes to make that claim appear to be unreal or technical But such an approach is contrary to the letter and spirit of Blackledge There we focused upon the accuseds apprehension of retaliatory motivation 417 US at 28 and we held that the Due Process Clause is violated when situations involving increased punishment pose a realistic likelihood of vindictiveness id at 27 In such situations the criminal defendants apprehension of retaliatory motivation does not amount to an unreal or technical violation of his constitutional rights On the contrary as we recognized in North Carolina v Pearce 395 US 711 725 1969 the fear of such vindictiveness may unconstitutionally deter a defendants exercise of his rights The Court does not contend that Blackledge is inapplicable to instances of pretrial as well as posttrial vindictiveness But after examining the record before us for objective indications of such vindictiveness the Court concludes ante at 382 that a presumption of vindictiveness is not warranted in this case With all respect I disagree both with the Courts conclusion and with its reasoning In my view the question here is not one of presumptions Rather I would analyze respondents claim in the terms employed by our precedents Did the elevation of the charges against respondent pose a realistic likelihood of vindictiveness 417 US at 27 Is it possible that the fear of such vindictiveness may unconstitutionally deter a person in respondents position from exercising his statutory and 457 US 368 390 constitutional right to a jury trial See North Carolina v Pearce supra at 725 The answer to these questions is plainly Yes The Court suggests ante at 383 that the distinction between a bench trial and a jury trial is unimportant in this context Such a suggestion is demonstrably fallacious Experienced criminal practitioners for both prosecution and defense know that a jury trial entails far more prosecutorial work than a bench trial Defense challenges to the potentialjuror array voir dire examination of potential jurors and suppression hearings all take up a prosecutors time before a jury trial adding to his scheduling difficulties and caseload More care in the preparation of his requested instructions of his witnesses and of his own remarks is The truth of my conclusion and the patent fallacy of the Courts is particularly evident on the record before us The practical effect of respondents demand for a jury trial was that the Government had to transfer the case from a trial before a Magistrate in Hyattsville to a trial before a District Judge and jury in Baltimore and had to substitute one prosecutor for another The Government thus suffered not only administrative inconvenience It also lost the value of the preparation and services of the first prosecutor and was forced to commit a second prosecutor to prepare the case 457 US 368 391 had the effect of clearly requiring increased expenditures of prosecutorial resources before the defendants conviction could finally be achieved 417 US at 27 And to paraphrase Blackledge if the prosecutor has the means readily at hand to discourage such elections by upping the ante through a felony indictment the State can insure that only the most hardy defendants will brave the hazards of a jury trial Cf id at 2728 I conclude that the facts of this case easily support the inference of a realistic likelihood of vindictiveness The Court discusses Bordenkircher v Hayes 434 US 357 1978 ante at 377380 and suggests some analogy between that case and the present one ante at 380 In my view such an analogy is quite inapt Bordenkircher dealt only with the context of plea bargaining and with the narrow situation in which the prosecutor openly presented the defendant with the unpleasant alternatives of forgoing trial or facing increased charges 434 US at 365 Bordenkircher did not remotely suggest that a pretrial increase in charges made as a response to a demand for jury trial would not present a realistic likelihood of vindictiveness when the demand put the prosecution to an added burden such as that imposed in this case Indeed Bordenkircher expressly distinguished its facts from those in Blackledge and Pearce In those cases the Court was dealing with the States unilateral imposition of a penalty upon a defendant who had chosen to exercise a legal right a situation very different from the giveandtake negotiation common in plea bargaining 434 US at 362 quoting Parker v North Carolina 397 US 790 809 1970 The facts in this case plainly fit within the pattern of Pearce and Blackledge not of Bordenkircher There was no ongoing giveandtake negotiation between respondent and the Government and there 457 US 368 392 was the unilateral imposition of a penalty in response to respondents choice to exercise a legal right Because it seems clear to me that Blackledge requires it I would affirm the judgment of the Court of Appeals Footnote 1 Two counts of speeding and one count of reckless driving in violation of 36 CFR 5031 5032 1981 are each punishable by fines of not more than 500 or imprisonment for not more than six months or both 36 CFR 505a 1981 One count of failing to give aid at the scene of an accident in violation of 18 USC 7 13 Md Transp Code Ann 20102 20104 1977 is punishable by a fine of not more than 1000 or imprisonment for not more than four months or both 27101c12 14 One count of fleeing from a police officer in Footnote 2 See District of Columbia v Colts 282 US 63 73 74 1930 United States v Hamdan 552 F2d 276 278280 CA9 1977 United States v SanchezMeza 547 F2d 461 464465 CA9 1976 United States v Potvin 481 F2d 380 381383 CA10 1973 Footnote 3 Assaulting resisting or impeding a federal officer with a deadly weapon in violation of 18 USC 111 is punishable by a fine of not more than 10000 or imprisonment for not more than 10 years or both Assault with a dangerous weapon in violation of 18 USC 113c is punishable by a fine of not more than 1000 or imprisonment for not more than five years or both A third count in the new indictment was fleeing from a police officer in violation of 18 USC 7 13 Md Transp Code Ann 21904 1977 which is punishable by a fine 457 US 368 393

O O O O O B I O O O O O O O O O O O O O O B I O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O B I O O O O O O O O O O O O O O B I O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O B I O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O B I O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O


React Color Slider Swatches 01 About 02 Getting Started Install Include Component 03 Component API color onChange onChangeComplete Individual APIs 04 Create Your Own Parent Component Helper Components 05 About 13 Different Pickers Sketch Photoshop Chrome and many more Make Your Own Use the building block components to make your own Getting Started Install Start by installing reactcolor via npm 1 npm install reactcolor save Include Component Import a color picker from reactcolor at the top of a component and then use it in the render function 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 import React from react import SketchPicker from reactcolor class Component extends React Component render return SketchPicker You can import AlphaPicker BlockPicker ChromePicker CirclePicker CompactPicker GithubPicker HuePicker MaterialPicker PhotoshopPicker SketchPicker SliderPicker SwatchesPicker TwitterPicker respectively Component API color Color controls what color is active on the color picker You can use this to initialize the color picker with a particular color or to keep it in sync with the state of a parent component Color accepts either a string of a hex color 333 or a object of rgb or hsl values r 51 g 51 b 51 or h 0 s 0 l 10 Both rgb and hsl will also take a a 1 value for alpha You can also use transparent 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 import React from react import SketchPicker from reactcolor class Component extends React Component state background fff handleChangeComplete color this setState background colorhex render return SketchPicker color thisstatebackground onChangeComplete thishandleChangeComplete In this case the color picker will initialize with the color fff When the color is changed handleChangeComplete will fire and set the new color to state onChange Pass a function to call every time the color is changed Use this to store the color in the state of a parent component or to make other transformations Keep in mind this is called on drag events that can happen quite frequently If you just need to get the color once use onChangeComplete 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 import React from react import SwatchesPicker from reactcolor class Component extends React Component handleChangecolor event color hex 333 rgb r 51 g 51 b 51 a 1 hsl h 0 s 0 l 20 a 1 render return SwatchesPicker onChange thishandleChange onChangeComplete Pass a function to call once a color change is complete 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 import React from react import PhotoshopPicker from reactcolor class Component extends React Component state background fff handleChangeComplete color event this setState background colorhex render return PhotoshopPicker onChangeComplete thishandleChangeComplete Individual APIs Some pickers have specific APIs that are unique to themselves Alpha width String Pixel value for picker width Default 316px height String Pixel value for picker height Default 16px direction String Enum horizontal or vertical Default horizontal renderers Object Use canvas Canvas with node canvas to do SSR pointer React Component Custom pointer component Block width String Pixel value for picker width Default 170px colors Array of Strings Color squares to display Default D9E3F0 F47373 697689 37D67A 2CCCE4 555555 dce775 ff8a65 ba68c8 triangle String Either hide or top Default top onSwatchHover An event handler for onMouseOver on the Swatch s within this component Gives the args color event Chrome disableAlpha Bool Remove alpha slider and options from picker Default false renderers Object Use canvas Canvas with node canvas to do SSR Circle width String Pixel value for picker width Default 252px colors Array of Strings Color squares to display Default f44336 e91e63 9c27b0 673ab7 3f51b5 2196f3 03a9f4 00bcd4 009688 4caf50 8bc34a cddc39 ffeb3b ffc107 ff9800 ff5722 795548 607d8b circleSize Number Value for circle size Default 28 circleSpacing Number Value for spacing between circles Default 14 onSwatchHover An event handler for onMouseOver on the Swatch s within this component Gives the args color event Compact colors Array of Strings Color squares to display Default 4D4D4D 999999 FFFFFF F44E3B FE9200 FCDC00 DBDF00 A4DD00 68CCCA 73D8FF AEA1FF FDA1FF 333333 808080 cccccc D33115 E27300 FCC400 B0BC00 68BC00 16A5A5 009CE0 7B64FF FA28FF 000000 666666 B3B3B3 9F0500 C45100 FB9E00 808900 194D33 0C797D 0062B1 653294 AB149E onSwatchHover An event handler for onMouseOver on the Swatch s within this component Gives the args color event Github width String Pixel value for picker width Default 200px colors Array of Strings Color squares to display Default B80000 DB3E00 FCCB00 008B02 006B76 1273DE 004DCF 5300EB EB9694 FAD0C3 FEF3BD C1E1C5 BEDADC C4DEF6 BED3F3 D4C4FB triangle String Either hide topleft or topright Default topleft onSwatchHover An event handler for onMouseOver on the Swatch s within this component Gives the args color event Hue width String Pixel value for picker width Default 316px height String Pixel value for picker height Default 16px direction String Enum horizontal or vertical Default horizontal pointer React Component Custom pointer component Photoshop header String Title text Default Color Picker onAccept Function Callback for when accept is clicked onCancel Function Callback for when cancel is clicked Sketch disableAlpha Bool Remove alpha slider and options from picker Default false presetColors Array of Strings or Objects Hex strings for default colors at bottom of picker Default D0021B F5A623 F8E71C 8B572A 7ED321 417505 BD10E0 9013FE 4A90E2 50E3C2 B8E986 000000 4A4A4A 9B9B9B FFFFFF presetColors may also be described as an array of objects with color and properties color f00 title red or a combination of both width Number Width of picker Default 200 renderers Object Use canvas Canvas with node canvas to do SSR onSwatchHover An event handler for onMouseOver on the Swatch s within this component Gives the args color event Slider pointer React Component Custom pointer component Swatches width Number Pixel value for picker width Default 320 height Number Pixel value for picker height Default 240 colors Array of Arrays of Strings An array of color groups each with an array of colors onSwatchHover An event handler for onMouseOver on the Swatch s within this component Gives the args color event Twitter width String Pixel value for picker width Default 276px colors Array of Strings Color squares to display Default FF6900 FCB900 7BDCB5 00D084 8ED1FC 0693E3 ABB8C3 EB144C F78DA7 9900EF triangle String Either hide topleft or topright Default topleft onSwatchHover An event handler for onMouseOver on the Swatch s within this component Gives the args color event Create Your Own Parent Component To make a custom color picker create a toplevel component that will act as the bridge with the CustomPicker high order component Wrap the export with the CustomPicker function 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 import React from react import CustomPicker from reactcolor class MyColorPicker extends React Component render return divMyColorPickerdiv export default CustomPickerMyColorPicker This component will be passed hex rgb and hsl values as props for the current color It is also provided an onChange prop that should be called to propagate a new color Pass it a hex string or an rgb or hsl object Helper Components Every color picker provided is made up of a collection of helper components Those components are accessible for you to use to make a custom color picker Alpha Use Alpha to display a slider to toggle the alpha value Make sure to wrap it in a div thats the size you want the slider to be and that it is position relative thisprops Pass down all the color props from your topmost component pointer Define a custom pointer component for the slider pointer onChange Function callback Make sure this calls the onChange function of the parent to make it change 1 2 3 4 5 6 var Alpha require reactcolorlibcomponentscommon Alpha thisprops pointer CustomPointer onChange thishandleChange EditableInput Use EditableInput to display an input label that acts as the single source of truth until the input is blurred label Used to put a label on the input value The value to be passed down to the input onChange Function callback Use this to call the onChange function of the parent Returns an object where the key is the label and the value is the new value style Inline css to style the children elements wrap input label 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 var EditableInput require reactcolorlibcomponentscommon var inputStyles input border none label fontSize 12px color 999 EditableInput style inputStyles labelhex value thispropshex onChange thishandleChange Hue Use Hue to display a slider to toggle the hue value Make sure to wrap it in a div thats the size you want the slider to be and that it is position relative thisprops Pass down all the color props from your topmost component pointer Define a custom pointer component for the slider pointer onChange Function callback Make sure this calls the onChange function of the parent to make it change direction Display direction of the slider Horizontal by default 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 var Hue require reactcolorlibcomponentscommon Hue thisprops pointer CustomPointer onChange thishandleChange direction horizontal vertical Saturation Use Saturation to display a saturation block that users can drag to change the value Make sure to wrap it in a div thats the size you want the block to be and that it is position relative thisprops Pass down all the color props from your topmost component pointer Define a custom pointer component for the slider pointer onChange Function callback Make sure this calls the onChange function of the parent to make it change 1 2 3 4 5 6 var Saturation require reactcolorlibcomponentscommon Saturation thisprops pointer CustomPointer onChange thishandleChange Checkboard The Checkboard component renders a background of black white checkerboard for use when displaying gradients or alpha Make sure to wrap it in a div thats the size you want the block to be and that it is position relative size Number Size of squares Default 8 white String Color of white squares Default transparent grey String Color of grey squares Default rgba00008 1 2 3 4 5 6 var Checkboard require reactcolorlibcomponentscommon Checkboard size 12 whitefff grey333 More Examples 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 use strict import React from react import ChromePicker from reactcolor class ButtonExample extends ReactComponent state displayColorPicker false handleClick this setState displayColorPicker this statedisplayColorPicker handleClose this setState displayColorPicker false render const popover position absolute zIndex 2 const cover position fixed top 0px right 0px bottom 0px left 0px return div button onClick thishandleClick Pick Colorbutton thisstatedisplayColorPicker div style popover div style cover onClick thishandleClose ChromePicker div null div export default ButtonExample 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77

O B O O O O O O O O O O O O O B O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O B O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O B B O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O B B O O B O O O O B B O O O O O O O B B O O O B O O O O O O O O O O O O O B O O O O O O O B O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O B O O O O O O O B O O O O O O O B B O O O O B O O O B O O O O O O O O O B O O O O O O O O O O O B O O O O O O O B O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O B O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O B O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O B O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O B O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O B O O O O O O O O B O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O B O O O O O O O B O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O B O O O O O O O O O O B O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O B O O O O O O O B O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O B O O O O O O B O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O B O O O O O O O B O O O O O O O B O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O B O O O O O O O B O O O O O O O O B O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O B O O O O O B B O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O B O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O B O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O B O O B O O O O O O O O O O O O B O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O B O O O O O O O O O O O O O O B O O O O O O O O B O O O O O O O O O O O O B O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O B O O O O O O O B O O O O O O O B O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O B O O O O O O O O O O B B O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O B O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O B O O O O O O O O O O O O O O B B O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O B B O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O B O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O B O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O B O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O B O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O B O O O O O O O B O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O


IPHY 2420 Nutrition for Health and Performance Instructor Contact Heather L Brady PhD MS RDN CLC Email heatherbradycoloradoedu About the Instructor Heather Brady received her BS degree in Biology at St Vincent College Dr Brady then earned a MS in Exercise Physiology and Nutrition at Kansas State University Upon completing her Masters Degree she spent the following year fulfilling the internship requirements for the Registered Dietitian program in Pittsburgh PA After becoming a dietitian she then moved to Denver almost 20 years ago to obtain her doctorate degree in Preventive Medicine and Epidemiology at the University of Colorado Health Sciences Center After graduating Dr Brady began a very fun career in professional speaking teaching and nutrition consulting Dr Bradys favorite activity is spending time with her two sons husband and two dogs Second to enjoying family fun is her love for running and athletic events It was while she was attending graduate school that she decided to run a marathon in order to relieve stress Shortly after completing the race she decided that she wanted to learn as much as possible about optimal nutritional fueling for sports Since then Dr Brady has finished 127 marathons including Boston and several ultramarathonsand counting In addition to being in love with the marathon distance she also enjoys volleyball cycling triathlons About The Course IPHY 2420 focuses on the basic anatomy physiology and chemistry of nutrition Topics include weight management the role of diet and lifestyle in disease prevention specific nutrient deficiencies and toxicities nutrition standards and guidelines sports nutrition recommendations agricultural practices and food policy issues IPHY juniors or seniors are excluded from taking this course Credit not granted for both IPHY 2420 and 3420 IPHY 2420 is approved for arts and sciences core curriculum natural science While a basic understanding of these topics is helpful it is not necessary in order to enroll in the course Some students are surprised that basic math skills are often utilized in a nutrition course For example you will need to calculate your calorie and nutrient carbohydrate protein fat needs As such basic math skills are necessary for several units in this course It is helpful if you always have your calculator handy Required texts Contemporary Nutrition A Functional Approach 5e by Gordon M Wardlaw Anne M Smith and Angela L Collene Grading ITEM POINTS NOTES My Health Project 225 3 sections Part A B C x 75 points each Email Introduction to me 25 Send email the first week of class Discussion Assignments 120 30 points x 4 discussions Practice Exam 10 Points added for completing exam Exam 1 100 Taken online in Canvas Exam 2 100 Taken online in Canvas Exam 3 100 Taken online in Canvas Total Possible Points 680 POINTS

O O B O B O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O B O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O B O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O B O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O B O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O B O O O O B O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O B O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O B O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O B O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O


Fishing

Reports

November

November

November

Older

Entries


Chief Electoral Officer Maharashtra Organization CEOs Desk General Information List of Assembly Constituencies List of Parliamentary Constituencies List of Polling Stations Information Linked to Polling Station Maps Right To Information Right To Information RTI Act List of Members Loksabha Rajya Sabha Vidhan Sabha Vidhan Parishad Candidates Affidavits Affidavits On ECI Portal Loksabha Election General Election Loksabha 2014 Loksabha 2009 ByeElection ByeElection 2018 ByeElection 2014 Rajya Sabha Election ByeElection ByeElection 2015 ByeElection 2014 ByeElection 2013 ByeElection 2011 Biennial Election Biennial Election 2018 Biennial Election 2016 Biennial Election 2014 Biennial Election 2010 Biennial Election 2008 Legislative Assembly General Election State Legislative Assembly 2014 State Legislative Assembly 2009 ByeElection ByeElection to 285 Palus Kadegaon LAC ByeElection to 130PalgharST LAC ByeElection to 176Vandre East LAC ByeElection to 287TasgaonKavathe Mahankal LAC ByeElection to 91Mukhed LAC ByeElection to 271Chandgad LAC ByeElection to 78Yavatmal LAC ByeElection to 211Khadakwasla LAC ByeElection to 137 Bhiwandi East LAC Legislative Council ByeElection Maharashtra Legislative Council by MLAs 2018 Maharashtra Legislative Council by MLAs 2017 Maharashtra Legislative Council by MLAs 2015 Jalgaon Local Authorities Constituency 2014 Maharashtra Legislative Council by MLA 2013 State Legislative Council of Maharashtra by the Members 2013 MLC by MLAApril 2011 MLC by MLA Feb2011 MLC from Nashik Local Authority Constituency 2011 Biennial Election Maharashtra Legislative Council by MLA 2018 MLC From 6 local authorites Constituencies 2018 MLC From 6 local authorites Constituencies 2016 Maharashtra Legislative Council by MLA 2016 MLC of Local Authorities Constituency 2016 MLC of Local Authorities Constituency 2015 Maharashtra Legislative Council by MLA 2014 Aurangabad cum Jalna Local Authority Constituency 2013 MLC from Thane Local Authority Constituency2010 Maharashtra Legislative Council By MLAs MayJune 2010 Legislative Council Nov 2010 Teachers and Graduates Biennial Election 2018 Biennial Election 2017 Elections Election Expenditure ByeElection 2018 11BhandaraGondiya and 22PalgharST of PC ByeElection 2016 130Palghar LAC ByeElection 2015 91Mukhed LAC 176Vandre East LAC Assembly Election 2014 Loksabha Election 2014 State Legislative Assembly 2009 Loksabha Election 2009 Political Party Accounts Report and Accounts statements of State Level Political Parties 201718 Report and Accounts statements of State Level Political Parties 201617 Report and Accounts statements of State Level Political Parties 201516 Report and Accounts statements of State Level Political Parties 201315 Election Results Legislative Assembly ByeElection 2018 ByeElection 2016 ByeElection 2015 General Election 2014 General Election 2009 Loksabha Election General Election 2009 State Legislative Council Byeelection to Maharashtra Legislative council by the MLA 2017 13Aurangabad Cum Jalna Local Authorities Constituency 2013 Teachers and Graduates Biennial Election 2017 Election Result Form 20 General Election ByeElection 11BhandaraGondiya and 22 PalgharST of PC 2018 39 Beed of PC 2014 Electoral Search Engine Voters Help Centres VHC Assembly Maps EVM FAQ on EVMs and VVPAT AV on EVM Marathi AV on EVM English Faqs on EVM AV On VVPAT Marathi AV On VVPAT English Credibility of EVM Marathi English Hindi Handbooks Manuals HandbooksManualsModel Check List on ECI Handbooks Manuals Download Forms Deletion List PDFs Publicity Materials Delimitation English Notification Marathi Notification Marathi Corrigendum Greater Mumbai Boundries Thane Urban Area Boundries Pune Urban Area Boundries FAQs Resident Electors Overseas Electors Gallery Photo Gallery Audio Gallery Video Gallery Disqualified Candidate List Lok sabha Election 2014 Assembly Election 2014 Archive of 0

B I I B O O O O O O O O O O O B I O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O B O O O O O B O O O O O B O O O O O O O O O O B O O O O O O O O O B O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O B O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O B O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O B O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O B O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O B O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O

parliamentary constituencies
chief electoral officer
maharashtra


Marriage For Registered Partnerships please click here PDF 40 KB This information sheet is for American citizens who wish to marry within the Embassys consular district The Swiss civil registrars in Basel Bern Lausanne and Geneva have provided the information Although we believe this information to be accurate the only definitive statement of requirements for marriage is that given by the Swiss civil registrar in the town or city where you wish to be married Swiss law precludes a consular officer from performing marriages The performance of marriage in Switzerland is exclusively a function of the Swiss civil authorities ie the civil registrar Only a civil marriage has legal status Swiss Documentary Requirements for all U S Citizens Birth Certificate You must have a certified copy of your birth certificate translated into GermanFrenchItalian issued within the last six months original birth certificate is not accepted It must show your full name date and place of birth and the full names of your parents including your mothers maiden name If you do not have a copy of your birth certificate check out httpwwwvitalreccom to find out how to obtain a duplicate US passport A valid passport is required except for military personnel Affidavit Each US Citizen must execute an affidavit before a US consular officer or a notary public in the United States in which he states under oath that he is legally free to marry You should present your US passport and if applicable evidence of termination of previous marriages You can apply for the affidavit at the Embassy in Bern or the Consular Agencies in Geneva and Zurich The cost is US 5000 or 50 Swiss Francs CHF All of the required documents must be presented at the time of application Additional Documents for Some Americans Military or civilian employees of the Armed Forces a A military ID card is required b Written authorization to marry issued by the commanding officer must be presented Divorced or widowed Divorced or widowed persons must present a certified copy of the divorce decree or death certificate If divorced the applicant must show that the divorce is legally effective in his state of domicile in the United States The divorce decree must state the date it became effective that is the final decree not the interlocutory decree In addition a certificate of the previous marriage may be required Under Age A written statement of consent by the parents signed before a notary public is required The determination if you are under age will be based on the laws of the state of domicile in the United States Females and males under 18 years of age can not be married in Switzerland This is Swiss law General Information You should contact the civil registrar in the city or town where you wish to be married for information concerning fees witnesses and the translation of documents No period of residence in Switzerland is required for marriage by a civil registrar The waiting period after the documents are submitted to the civil registrar can last up to 5 weeks to allow for the publication of bans The addresses of the main civil registrars offices are Zivilstandsamt Rittergasse 11 4051 Basel Tel 061 267 95 90 Fax 061 267 67 49 wwwzivilstandsamtbsch Email zvabsch Zivilstandskreis BernMittelland Laupenstrasse 18A 3008 Bern Tel 031 635 4200 Fax 031 635 4201 Email zamittellandpombech Etat civil 37 rue de la Mairie 1207 Genève Tel 022 418 66 50 Fax 022 418 66 51 Email webmastervillegech Etat civil 8 rue BeauSéjour 1003 Lausanne Tel 021 315 29 82 Email centreetatcivilvdch Ufficio dello Stato Civile Palazzo Civico Piazza Riforma 6900 Lugano Tel 091 800 70 33 Email diuscluganotich Zivilstandsamt Obergrundstrasse 1 6003 Luzern Tel 041 208 81 11 wwwstadtluzernch Email zastadtluzernch Zivilstandsamt Stadthaus Stadthausquai 17 8001 Zurich Tel 044 216 31 11 wwwstadtzuerichch Download Adobe Reader

B O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O B O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O B O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O B O O O B I I O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O B O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O B O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O