Does double jeopardy apply to misdemeanor traffic offenses in Ohio?
I'm really hoping someone with some sort of law background in this area and knowledge in ohio law can weigh in here. Ok, so here's the scoop. About a year ago I was pulled over for no front plate and window tint being too dark. I went to court and the window tint charge was thrown out because I showed evidence it wasn't too dark. I was convicted on the no front plate thing. Now, I've been pulled over for the same thing again. I still do not have a front plate because there is just no place to put it on my car. I've searched for brackets to no avail. It's a older model car and I just can't find one. Anyway, does double jeopardy apply here? According to the definition of double jeopardy..."Double jeopardy is a procedural defence that forbids a defendant from being tried again on the same (or similar) charges following a legitimate acquittal or conviction. In common law countries, a defendant may enter a peremptory plea of autrefois acquit or autrefois convict (autrefois means "in the past" in French), meaning the defendant has been acquitted or convicted of the same offence." Now I would definitely say I fall under that category. My only question is whether or not it applies to traffic offences. My window tint was dismissed and I was convicted on the plate thing. Can I be tried again for the same thing? Someone please help!
Does the double jeopardy rule apply to presidential impeachment procedings?
I would think SO. BUT just like a Serial Killer who beats One murder charge perhaps cannot be charged again for THAT one, They CAN BE Charged for any others they comitted. and obama has Abused his powers so many times, they could keep parading that one out.
Does a US President who has undergone an impeachment trial have the same protections against double jeopardy as a normal criminal case?
I doubt it because impeachment remains a political exercise — a vote of ‘no-confidence’ — to remove the leader targeted; those targeted leaders rarely go to jail but must be tried separately after the removal from office. On the other hand, that subsequent legal proceeding falls under jurisprudence and not in political sphere. This answer relies on the case of the O.J. Simpson murder case. Criminal law failed to convict the former girdiron star.CUTTING EDGE AND TOTALLY COOLNevertheless, his ex-wife’s and one other family won a case in civil court for a $33.5 million punitive payments. This process, independent from the criminal justice system, may well have its own version of jeopardy. Yet that independence implies that two jeopardies may be involved that do not add up to double jeopardy.
Does double jeopardy apply to presidential impeachment? For example, if impeachment proceedings were implemented against Trump and he was not impeached, could a Democratic Senate/House have another go later in the year on the same evidence?
Here was my answer to a recent, similar question:No (double jeopardy does not apply) , and for many reasons.First of all, the double jeopardy part refers to actual trials. A grand jury could consider indicting a person multiple times. Double jeopardy would only come into effect if they tried to hold multiple trials for the same person for the same crime.Second, double jeopardy does not apply to impeachment.The well known prohibition against double jeopardy comes from the following line in the Fifth Amendment:nor shall any person be subject for the same offence to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb;The meaning of that has been extended to include jeopardy of any criminal punishment.However, the Constitution is clear on the punishment for being impeached From Article I, Section 3:Judgment in Cases of Impeachment shall not extend further than to removal from Office, and disqualification to hold and enjoy any Office of honor, Trust or Profit under the United States …Since impeachment does not include any jeopardy of criminal punishment, double jeopardy does not apply. (Of course, that has never been tested. If SCOTUS says I am wrong, then I am wrong.)
How does Double Jeopardy work here? If Trump is not convicted in the Senate, can he still be tried in federal court?
The short answer is that double jeopardy does not apply to such a situation, nor to the distinction between Federal and state criminal charges.Impeachment is a political process, although it uses the term “trial” under the Constitution, it is not a criminal trial and many of the rights generally afforded criminal defendants are not guaranteed to an impeached official.Thus, if a sitting President were impeached and found “not guilty” of “high crimes and misdemeanors” — as both Andrew Johnson and Bill Clinton were — this would not preclude a prosecution for any criminal charges as defined by Federal or State statutes.There remains a question of whether a sitting President can be charged with a crime, and there are no Constitutional or statutory provisions that grant the President immunity as there are for legislators. That being the case, legally there is no bar to filing criminal charges against a sitting President. There are, however, customary and pragmatic bars to doing so, as the Justice Department has noted in their memos on the subject. Fortunately, we’ve never been in a position as a country to test this — and hopefully we will not. The closest we came was during the fallout from Watergate, which ended with the President resigning and receiving a Presidential pardon for any Federal crimes he might later be accused of.Tangenting off there for a moment, it’s important to realize that neither a Presidential pardon, nor Federal criminal charges would preclude a State from pursuing criminal charges against a (let’s just presume former) President. Double Jeopardy has what is known as the “dual sovereign” exception — meaning that if something is a crime under both Federal and State law, a finding of not guilty in one jurisdiction does not prevent the other jurisdiction (as a separate legal sovereign) from pursuing criminal charges as well.
Can a president be impeached more than once during his term of four years? If he wasn't convicted the first time could they do it again and again until they get a conviction, especially if they have new or different charges?
The Supreme Court has no role in the impeachment process, though the Chief Justice does preside over the Senate impeachment trial if the President is impeached.Article I, Section 2 of the Constitution gives the House of Representatives “Sole Power of Impeachment.”Sole power. No one else can get involved, including the Supreme Court. Article I, Section 3 gives the Senate “sole power to try all impeachments.”Now, could you have a situation, theoretically, when the House impeaches a president, and the Senate acquits him, and the House impeaches him again, and the Senate acquits him again, and this goes on and on? In theory, yes. The Constitution makes clear that the House of Representatives alone gets to be the judge of whether a civil officer of the United States is or should be impeached, and the Senate alone gets to decide whether an impeached official is guilty. So there’s no room for any other branch to get involved. Impeachment is not a criminal process, it’s a political process, and its only potential consequences are removal from office and being barred from holding future office. Double jeopardy only applies in criminal cases, and “sole power” means it’s very unlikely a president who was impeached more than once would be able to get a court to even consider a challenge to their impeachment on those or any other legal grounds. The constitution simply allows no room for the judicial branch in the impeachment process, because the process is meant to be political; it is meant to be carried out by elected representatives of the people, not by appointed judges.That being said, the spectacle of repeated impeachments of the same President is staggeringly unlikely. Impeachment takes time, and it also takes a lot of political will; there would almost certainly be a real political cost to a House majority that kept impeaching a President who had been acquitted (or to Senators who repeatedly voted against convicting a clearly guilty President.) Impeachment is incredibly, incredibly rare in the American political system, and so there’s really very little chance we’d ever see something like this happen.
If the President is impeached in the House but acquitted in trial by the Senate, how does the 5th amendment double jeopardy clause apply?
Technically, it doesn’t. But it might almost as well.The concept of double jeopardy is introduced in the Fifth Amendment, a portion of which reads:nor shall any person be subject for the same offence to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb;The “jeopardy of life or limb” part has been expanded by court decisions and is now taken to include any criminal punishment whatsoever.But the discussion of impeachment penalties in Articel I, Section 3:Judgment in Cases of Impeachment shall not extend further than to removal from Office, and disqualification to hold and enjoy any Office of honor, Trust or Profit under the United States:makes it clear that impeachment does not lead to any criminal punishment whatsoever.On the other hand, if you try once, and fail, you have left the President in a stronger position than before. If you try again, he and his supporters will say, “You did this already, and you couldn’t prove some of your accusations, and the Senate found that the rest do not rise to the level of impeachable offenses.”GRRMartin’s Circe said it quite succintly. “When you play the game of thrones, you win or you die. There is no middle ground.”It is worse than pointless to start impeachment proceedings before establishing a non-partisan near consensus among the electorate that the President needs to be removed. So even though the President has done several things that the Founders would have impeached him for, any attempt to start impeachment now would be premature.Thanks for asking, Chris O'Leary .Q: If the President is impeached in the House but acquitted in trial by the Senate, how does the 5th amendment double jeopardy clause apply?