In Jeffers v. United States (1976), the Supreme Court ruled on a case involving double jeopardy, which is the legal principle that an individual cannot be tried twice for the same crime. The defendant, Jeffers, had been convicted of both conspiracy to distribute and distribution of heroin in federal court and was later charged with possession of heroin by Arizona state authorities based on evidence from the same transaction. He appealed his conviction arguing it violated his Fifth Amendment protection against double jeopardy. However, the Supreme Court upheld his conviction stating that dual sovereignty doctrine allows separate sovereigns - here being federal government and a state - to prosecute an individual for identical offenses without violating constitutional protections against double jeopardy.

In the dissenting opinion for Jeffers v. United States, Justice White argued that the majority's decision was inconsistent with previous rulings on double jeopardy. He contended that a defendant should not be able to avoid multiple punishments for the same offense simply by strategically timing their appeals or motions to vacate sentence. According to him, this approach would allow defendants who are guilty of multiple offenses to escape punishment for some of them and undermine public confidence in the justice system. Furthermore, he disagreed with the majority's interpretation of Section 3568 as it pertains to concurrent sentences; instead asserting that when a prisoner is serving concurrent sentences and one is set aside on appeal, credit against any remaining sentence should continue from original date rather than resetting upon resentencing.