In article ,
"83LowRider" wrote:

wrote:

DJ only applies if they are found guilty.

Double jeopardy is when you've been found innocent.

I meant to say "DJ only applies if they are found "not guilty".

Figured that, but wanted to clarify.


It would have to be a different charge entirely.

That isn't exactly true. If a crime exists at both the federal
and state level, they can in fact try you separately for both,
even after you've been acquitted of one.

I'd need to see some examples of that. Not saying it couldn't
happen, but a lawyer would have a field day with it.

From Wikipedia, but in this case, it is actually right (grin)
In Blockburger v. United States (1932), the Supreme Court announced the
following test: the government may separately try and punish the
defendant for two crimes if each crime contains an element that the
other does not.[66] An example of this is the successful prosecution
under 18 U.S.C. § 242 (deprivation of rights under color of law) of some
of the Los Angeles police officers involved in the Rodney King beating
after their acquittal in California state court on charges of assault
with a deadly weapon and excessive use of force by a police officer.[67]
Blockburger is the default rule, unless the governing statute
legislatively intends to depart; for example, Continuing Criminal
Enterprise (CCE) may be punished separately from its predicates,[68] as
can conspiracy.[69]
The Blockburger test, originally developed in the multiple punishments
context, is also the test for prosecution after conviction.[70] In Grady
v. Corbin (1990), the Court held that a double jeopardy violation could
lie even where the Blockburger test was not satisfied,[71] but Grady was
overruled in United States v. Dixon (1993).[72]
--
³Statistics are like bikinis. What they reveal is suggestive,
but what they conceal is vital.²
‹ Aaron Levenstein