Can someone explain Double Jeopardy to me

[Friendsplacect]

I know Double Jeopardy is when you are tried twice for the same crime.
However I read about the same elements used for 1 crime to convict cant be used for a separate charge.

Thoughts anyone?

[Friendsplacect]

Originally Posted by Right to the Castle

Right. Each crimes has its own elements however ONE act can produce multiple offenses.

DUI and DWI are very common charges uses to distinguish the concept.

One act can produce multiple offenses based on different unrelated elements, correct?

[farmer_giles_of_ham]

I think what you are getting at is an "included offense"- an offense made up of elements which together with some other are also chargeable to another offense.

Like- criminal trespass of occupied structures is a lesser offense included in the greater one of burglary. Burglary has all the elements of trespass, plus the intention to commit another crime once inside

Or- assault is included in carjacking


etc.

I once got cited for both 'suspended local DL', and 'display foreign license on suspended local DL'. The first one is included in the second: equal grading, but cant charge both at same time. That would be double jeopardy.

[Friendsplacect]

Originally Posted by farmer_giles_of_ham

I think what you are getting at is an "included offense"- an offense made up of elements which together with some other are also chargeable to another offense.

Like- criminal trespass of occupied structures is a lesser offense included in the greater one of burglary. Burglary has all the elements of trespass, plus the intention to commit another crime once inside

Or- assault is included in carjacking


etc.

I once got cited for both 'suspended local DL', and 'display foreign license on suspended local DL'. The first one is included in the second: equal grading, but cant charge both at same time. That would be double jeopardy.

Ya thats what I was looking for. This patricular case involves elements that were already plead Guilty to and sentenced. Now they are going back and using the same elements and charging a breach of the peace based on the same elements.

[Friendsplacect]

Very strange in Connecticut I see a difference between what the Statutes state and what the Procedural Rule Book states.

Under the Statute a Felony does not have to be prosecuted by Information. Yet in the Rule book it states "All Felonies shall be prosecuted by information". It also states that an information shall be signed by the prosecutor and the prosecutor shall without necessary delay, review the acts complained of and determine whether it appears that there is reasonable cause to believe an offense has been committed within the jurisdiction of the court.

It also states, "prior to arraignment of the defendant before the judicial authority to determine the existence of probable cause to believe such person committed the offense charged or to determine of such persons release pursuant to Section 38-4, the prosecuting authority shall provide the defendant or counsel with a copy of any affidavit or report submitted to the court for the purpose of making such determination."

However I cant find neither of those in Statute.

I questioned a Lawyer on that and he told me the Police report is the information. And when it goes to trial the prosecutor turns in the "Long Form"

[Shoonra]

Double jeopardy has led to a lot of court decisions explaining the Constitutional protection against double jeopardy.
As a broad generality, the same event cannot be the subject of more than one trial; so that, for the same single event, a defendant cannot first be tried for attempted murder, and if acquitted then the prosecutor goes after him for aggravated assault of the same person.

There are, however, certain exception, such as murder or aggravated assault under state law may also be treated as civil rights violation in federal law. This second nibble by the prosecution (actually switching from state to federal prosecutor) was applauded in civil rights cases in the 1960s, but some of us had a slightly different attribute in 1992 (IIRC) when the cops involved in the Rodney King beating were tried a second time and in a city intimidated by rioters.

If a trial does not reach a normal verdict but is terminated by something other than a conventional verdict, there is also a debate about whether a retrial is possible.

Lots of opportunities for lawyers to become rich arguing the details.

[Shoonra]

I said it was not an easy topic.
Some mistrials are because something happened that could have been avoided. The question is, was the trial going so badly that the prosecution derailed it with a mistrial so it could have a do-over? Questions like that.