Double jeopardy
In jurisprudence, double jeopardy is a procedural defense (and, in the US, a constitutional right), which forbids a defendant from being tried a second time for a crime, after having already been tried for the same crime.
| Table of contents |
|
2 United Kingdom 3 France |
United States
The phrase "double jeopardy" stems from the Fifth Amendment to the US Constitution: "nor shall any person be subject for the same offence to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb." This clause is intended to limit prosecutorial abuse by the government in repeated prosecution, for the same offense, as a means of harassment or oppression. It is also in harmony with the concept of res judicata, which prevents courts from relitigating issues and claims that have already been the subject of a final judgment.
This law is occasionally referred to as a legal technicality, especially when it is used as a criminal defense. It is not uncommon, for example, for police to uncover new evidence proving the guilt of someone previously acquitted of a serious crime. There is little they can do in this case, because the first acquittal is final, and the defendant may not be tried again despite the new evidence.
Some situations that might appear to violate double jeopardy are not considered so by the courts, if the charge was the subject of an earlier trial in which a final judgment was not rendered. For example, a second trial held after a mistrial does not violate the double-jeopardy clause, because a mistrial ends a trial prematurely without a judgment of guilt or innocence. Thus, mistrials due to hung juries do not attach jeopardy and can be retried, but cases which have been dismissed because of insufficient evidence may constitute a judgment for these purposes. A re-trial after a conviction has been reversed on appeal also does not violate double jeopardy, because the judgment in the first trial has been invalidated. In both of these cases, however, the earlier trials do not entirely vanish, because testimony from them may be used in later retrials, such as to impeach subsequent contradictory testimony.
Double jeopardy is not implicated for separate offenses or in separate jurisdictions arising from the same act. For example, in US v. Felix (1992), the Supreme Court ruled: "a[n]...offense and a conspiracy to commit that offense are not the same offense for double jeopardy purposes." As another example, a state might try a defendant for murder, after which the federal government might try the same defendant for a federal crime (perhaps a civil rights violation or kidnapping) related to the same act. For example, the policemen who beat up black motorist Rodney King in 1991 were acquitted by a county court of the accusation of assault; some were sentenced in federal court for violating his civil rights. Similar techniques were used for prosecuting racially-motivated crimes in the Southern United States in the 1960s, which were not actively prosecuted nor convicted in local courts. Another example, Timothy McVeigh, was sentenced to death for murdering eight US federal employees with a bomb, but could also have been tried in state court for murdering the rest of those whom he killed in the same explosion.
Double jeopardy also does not attach if the later charge is not criminal in nature, but brought under a different legal standard. Acquittal in a criminal case does not prevent the defendant from being the defendant in a civil suit relating to the same incident. For example, O.J. Simpson was acquitted of double homicide, but lost a wrongful death civil claim brought over the same victims. If the defendant happened to be on parole from an earlier offense at the time, the act for which he was acquitted can also be the subject of a parole violation hearing, which is not considered a criminal trial and is also subject to a lower standard of proof.
In Illinois vs Aleman, a man (Harry Aleman) who bribed a judge (Frank Wilson) was tried again for murder after having been acquitted. The Supreme Court ruled that his first trial did not really put him in jeopardy because of his bribe.
United Kingdom
The Parliament of the United Kingdom passed legislation in 2003 introduced by Home Secretary David Blunkett to abolish this strict form of double jeopardy. Retrials are now allowed if there is 'new and compelling evidence'.
Double jeopardy is also a term from the gameshow Jeopardy; it refers to the second round of the game, when all point values are doubled.
Double Jeopardy is also a movie made in 1999 starring Tommy Lee Jones and Ashley Judd, about a woman who is framed for the murder of her husbandFrance
Once all appeals have been exhausted on a case, the judgment is final and the action of the prosecution is closed, with some very specific exceptions. A person who has been convicted may request another trial on grounds of new evidence.