6 results for 'cat:"Criminal Procedure" AND cat:"Double Jeopardy"'.
J. Mead finds that the lower court properly convicted defendant following a jury trial for “hunting a deer after having killed one,” as well as unlawful possession of wild animals. On appeal, he fails to show that the charge for possession of wild animals was barred under double jeopardy principles. Additionally, the matter is remanded for reconsideration of a stay order. The lower court had “the authority to order the original stay” and should decide whether to reinstate it. Affirmed.
Court: Maine Supreme Court, Judge: Mead, Filed On: May 7, 2024, Case #: 2024ME33, Categories: criminal Procedure, Sentencing, double Jeopardy
J. Williamowski finds the trial court properly denied defendant's motion to dismiss for double jeopardy violations. Although his initial convictions for retaliation and attempted murder were vacated on improper venue grounds, the vacatur of those convictions had nothing to do with his criminal culpability and were instead the result of a procedural error that did not implicate his double jeopardy rights. Affirmed.
Court: Ohio Court Of Appeals, Judge: Williamowski, Filed On: May 6, 2024, Case #: 2024-Ohio-1736, Categories: criminal Procedure, Murder, double Jeopardy
J. Oliver finds that the trial court should have dismissed felony aggravated assault charges against defendant for a domestic violence incident with his brother-in-law on double jeopardy grounds. After the first day of trial the initial judge realized he was defendant's distant relative through marriage, so the presiding judge of the district recused him. The initial judge then discharged the jury and declared a mistrial. But since the initial judge had been disqualified, and he failed to provide the parties an opportunity to object to jury discharge as required under the legal necessity exception to double jeopardy, those acts were taken without authority and the mistrial functioned as an acquittal. Where a judge is disqualified after a trial has begun, either the reviewing judge or the newly assigned judge must first address whether to declare a mistrial and then decide whether the discharge the jury. Reversed.
Court: Utah Court Of Appeals, Judge: Oliver, Filed On: April 4, 2024, Case #: 20221076-CA, Categories: criminal Procedure, double Jeopardy, Domestic Violence
J. McCool finds that the lower court properly convicted and sentenced defendant for capital murder. Contrary to defendant's argument, his second trial did not violate double jeopardy principles. The evidence does not show that the state "intentionally provoked" defendant into moving for a mistrial during the first trial. Also, the court concludes that "Section 9 does not bar retrial of a defendant" under the circumstances. Affirmed.
Court: Alabama Court of Criminal Appeals, Judge: McCool, Filed On: February 9, 2024, Case #: CR-21-0199, Categories: criminal Procedure, Murder, double Jeopardy
Want access to unlimited case records and advanced research tools? Create your free CasePortal account now. No credit card required to register.
Try CasePortal for Free
J. Pritzker finds that the lower court improperly convicted defendant of one of three counts of drug possession in a superseding indictment because the mistrial did not dismiss the original indictment; the superseding indictment was a nullity; and defendant could be retried only on the two counts included in the original indictment. However, double jeopardy did not attach due to the mistrial. Reversed in part.
Court: New York Appellate Divisions, Judge: Pritzker, Filed On: July 13, 2023, Case #: 110159, Categories: criminal Procedure, Drug Offender, double Jeopardy