Double Jeopardy

Understanding Double Jeopardy: A Complex Legal Concept

The principle of double jeopardy – being tried twice for the same crime – is an ancient legal concept that can be tricky to grasp fully. Let’s break it down in simple terms and see some real-world examples.

What Is Double Jeopardy?

Double jeopardy refers to prosecuting or punishing someone twice for the same criminal offense. The Fifth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution states that no person shall “be subject for the same offense to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb.” So basically, you can’t be tried again for something you’ve already been tried for once.
This prevents someone from being wrongfully convicted for something they didn’t do. Like, if someone is found innocent at trial, the prosecution can’t just try again and again until they get a guilty verdict. That wouldn’t be fair or just.

When Does Double Jeopardy Apply?

There’s more fine print to double jeopardy than you might think. It doesn’t automatically apply every time the same crime is charged twice. Here are some examples of when it does and doesn’t apply:

It Applies When…

Someone is acquitted (found not guilty) at trial and the prosecution wants to retry the case. You can’t just try someone over and over for the same crime hoping for a different outcome.
Someone is convicted at trial, completes their sentence, and then the prosecution wants to charge them again for that same crime. Once you serve your time, you’ve paid your debt to society.
Charges are dismissed with prejudice – meaning they can’t be refiled. This is essentially an acquittal.

It Doesn’t Apply When…

There is a mistrial – no verdict is reached. Since jeopardy didn’t terminate, they can be retried.
Separate sovereigns (like state and federal government) charge the person with violating different laws. So if you murder someone, a state can charge you with homicide and the feds can charge you with violating federal civil rights law.
The crime has elements that continue over time. So if you commit tax fraud one year then again another year, the second year is a new crime.
An appeals court overturns a conviction and orders a retrial. The person is still in “continuing jeopardy” throughout the appeal process.

Real-World Examples

To make more sense of this, let’s look at some real cases where double jeopardy was debated:

People v. O.J. Simpson

We all know about O.J. Simpson’s famous murder trial – he was acquitted in 1995 of killing his ex-wife Nicole Brown Simpson and Ron Goldman. However, Simpson was later sued by the victims’ families in civil court and found liable for the deaths and ordered to pay millions in damages.
How could he be acquitted of murder but still found legally responsible? Because double jeopardy prevents someone from being criminally prosecuted twice for the same offense – civil cases are different. The burden of proof is much lower and civil courts can find someone liable even when there’s not enough evidence for a criminal conviction.

Grady v. Corbin

In this 1990 Supreme Court case, a drunk driver caused a deadly accident but was only ticketed for traffic violations like driving drunk and failing to keep right. When the victim later died, prosecutors wanted to charge him with more serious crimes like vehicular manslaughter.
The Supreme Court said this violated double jeopardy – the traffic tickets counted as prior “jeopardy” for the same conduct and facts. Even though the offenses had different elements, it all stemmed from one act of drunk driving.

United States v. Felix

The Supreme Court ruled in 1992 that double jeopardy didn’t prevent federal prosecution of a drug dealer who had already been convicted in state court. His defense argued this counted as double jeopardy since it concerned the same criminal operation.
However, the Court said it counted as separate offenses against the state and federal governments. Plus, the federal case relied heavily on evidence not used in the state trial, about Felix’s past involvement in meth manufacturing.

Why Is It an Important Right?

The ban on double jeopardy serves some key purposes:
It prevents the government from abusing its power and retrying people until they get the “right” verdict. Citizens shouldn’t have to live in fear of being prosecuted over and over for the same alleged crime.
It protects the finality and integrity of jury verdicts. Jury decisions should be respected; prosecutors shouldn’t get unlimited chances to achieve a conviction.
It reduces the burden on defendants, who otherwise might have to defend themselves repeatedly against the same accusations, even after being vindicated.