Double Jeopardy

You don't have to worry about a criminal committing the same crime twice, why? Because they won't be alive to even think about it!. The Eighth Amendment to the United States Constitution states “Excessive bail shall not be required, nor excessive fines imposed, nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted.”, in other words, it protects American citizens from excessive or unnecessary punishments, fines, and bails. However, the death penalty is still an exception to “cruel and unusual punishments” when the punishment does not violate the standards of the Eighth Amendment. Based on the creation of death penalty in the eighth amendment, the constitution can be claimed as an inconsistently valuable but viable document in modern America. The death penalty also known as capital punishment is one that brings a lot of controversies but at the same time has been practiced throughout history in different forms and styles.

The four basic components of the Fifth Amendment include: double jeopardy, due process, the right to be heard by a jury and safeguards against self-incrimination. Double jeopardy is when the individual can only be tried for a crime once. In the event that they are acquitted and new information surfaces, they cannot be retried again for the same crime. Instead, new charges would have to be filed showing the individual violated another area of the law. (Sundahl, 2011)

Clause number two is the Double Jeopardy Clause. This protects you from being prosecuted twice for the same crime after conviction or acquittal, or multiple punishments for the same crime. This does not count if one is a civil case and one is a criminal case. A person can be prosecuted by the state and the federal government if he/she has committed a crime in state and federal jurisdiction. Usually the federal side will concede to the state and not prosecute.

Amendment VI gives people the right to a quick and public trial in front of an impartial jury. This assures a fair trial. Trying to defend in a case where the jury comes into the courthouse with the preconceived notion that the defendant is already is nearly impossible and

The Fifth Amendment states that “ no person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury, except for cases arising in the land and naval forces, or in the Militia, when in actual service in time of war or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offence to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.” This amendment states in the first line that, no one can be put on trial for a serious crime unless decided by a Grand Jury that there is enough proof to need a trial. It also states if there is enough proof then the Grand Jury can decide to indict them and they can be charged with the crime. The second line states that military personnel can go to a trial without a Grand Jury first deciding so, this is only applicable in time of war or national emergency. In the third line of the Fifth Amendment states that if someone is put on trial and the trial ends then the person cannot

Petitioner’s appeal from a denial of that motion was dismissed by the Court of Appeals without any prejudice to relief under the Maryland. The petition for post- conviction relief was dismissed by the trial court; and on appeal the Court of appeals held that suppression of the evidence by the prosecution denied petitioner due process of law and remanded the case for a retrial of the question of punishment, not the question of guilt.

In 1976, the United States Supreme Court, in Gregg v. Georgia, 428 U.S. 153 (1976), Jurek v. Texas, 428 U.S. 262 (1976), and Proffitt v. Florida, 428 U.S. 242 (1976) held that the discretion to impose the death sentence for specific crimes was to be bi-furcated into two separate trials. The first to determine guilt or innocence; the second to determine the aggravating and mitigating factors. The State of Oceana adopted the findings of the U.S. Supreme Court in People v. Wende, 600 P. 2d 1071 (Cal: Supreme Court 1979) In

which stated that when the accused is being tried in a state court, he or she does not have the protection of the exclusionary rule, which protects against illegal search

A person who has been acquitted in a trial by grand jury may not be put on trial again.

The rule of being innocent until proven guilty is promoted in the eighth amendment as well. That mean the person being charged shall not face jail time until it is proven that they have done the crime.

Procedural History: Prosecutors unhappy with the jury’s decision appealed the case to the Connecticut Supreme Court of Errors. The Court than included Palko confession and ordered a new trial, the defendant attorney objected claiming the new trial would be in violation of the Fifth Amendment; of double jeopardy. However,

The 5th amendment declares No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the Militia, when in actual service in time of War or public danger; nor shall any person

Because of the failed objective, the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals said that a person cannot get rid of his/her death sentence unless surmounting a Texas rule that is analogous federal rule. The Almanza v. State case made Texas adopt a rule stating that a criminal defendant who does not object to the jury’s instruction will not receive a reversal just because the instruction mistake was harmful. Instead, the defendant must meet a heightened standard, but if the standard is not met the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals will make the petitioner’s sentence stand (Kennedy).

In this case, the second trial would not be considered double jeopardy. Double jeopardy means that a person cannot be tried twice for the same crime. He was never acquitted of the crime. Since the jury could not reach a verdict, it was a mistrial case. Once a verdict was reached and carried out, Devine could not be trailed again for same crime. In the case that the defendant appeals and obtains reversal of a conviction, they may be tried again. The reversal means that the defendant was not in jeopardy. The reversal is basically a willingness of the defendant to be tried for crime. In another case, If the crime is committed against two or more people or in multiple states or if the crime is in violation of both state and federal laws the defendants protection against double jeopardy does not prevent multiple trials.

At the retrial, Green was tried again for first degree murder under the indictment. At the beginning of the trial, he raised the defense of former jeopardy, but the court overruled his plea. He was found guilty and was sentenced to a mandatory death sentence. At this trial, Green was tried again for first degree murder even though the original jury had found him guilty of second degree murder. The second trial for first degree murder placed Green in jeopardy twice for the same offense in violation of the Constitution's Fifth Amendment Double Jeopardy Clause.