In what cases can a mistrial lead to the charges being refiled even after the jury was empaneled (hence double jeopardy attached)? Is it only if the jury hangs, or can other circumstances allow for a new trial?
I can relate a story told to me by an attorney who was a friend. He was the defendant’s attorney. The defendant was also a friend of mine.The defendant had been arrested for DUI and I believe because of previous DUIs it was a fairly serious charge. This was in an area where it was extremely rare for a defendant to request a jury for DUI charges.The trial date was set and the case called. The defense attorney requested a jury. The judge was not pleased with the request and threatened the defense attorney with sanctions if he didn’t go head with a jury trial. The defense attorney responded that he absolutely wanted a jury empaneled.So it was, and eventually the jury was sworn in. The defense attorney then asked for the case to be dismissed. That went over much worse than the request for a jury trial.He explained to the judge that the defendant had never been arraigned and that was a fatal error and the jury empaneled and double jeopardy applied and the case was over.The judge exploded in rage and ordered the defense attorney and prosecutor to research the matter and return after a recess. The defense attorney had of course already researched the point (which is why he asked for a jury in the first place).After researching the matter with the prosecutor, the prosecutor agreed and they returned to court. Of course the judge’s day was not getting any better.The judge then said that if the defendant did not plead guilty he would hold him in contempt of court for not showing up for arraignment (obviously, BS as it was the court’s fault that he wasn’t arraigned).In the end the defendant plead guilty and got a minimal fine. He could have been looking at some time in lockup has he been convicted in a normal trial, or plead guilty right away.
What would happen if a prosecutor in the middle of a criminal trial decided to drop all of the charges of the defendant?
This happens all the time in Canada.In virtually every drug case, every drunk driving case, and many other types of cases, the defence argues that the Crown’s evidence was obtained in violation of his Charter rights. A voir dire (trial within a trial) is then held to determine whether or not the evidence is admissible. If the judge excludes it, and the prosecution does not have enough other evidence to proceed with the charges, then we direct a stay of proceedings.A stay of proceedings effectively ends the matter. The trial is over, any bail conditions that the accused was bound by are at an end. A stay does not trigger any kind of double jeopardy protection for the accused, but retrials after a stay are almost unheard of.There are other situations where a stay is directed mid-trial. Usually it involves a fatal defect in the Crown’s case that we didn’t know about. Like, say, our star witness is a lying sack of poo. Many prosecutors will direct a stay of proceedings at that point. My own practise is, generally, to call no further evidence and then invite the judge to acquit. That is often the more fair result.It is worth noting that a stay of proceedings does not involve the judge, and is not subject to the judge’s review or permission. We are directing the clerk of the court to make an entry on the record that the proceedings are stayed by our direction, and the clerk is required to make that entry on the record. Sometimes that is done without the judge even being present, though the easiest way to do it is in court, on the record, before the presiding judge.
Can you be charged with the same crime twice?
Short answer. Yes. You can be charged for the same crime over and over and over and over. Charged and dropped…forever until you got a Judge to give you a restraining order on the Prosecutor… ;)However….once a Jury has given a verdict in a case at that point something called “double jeopardy” attaches to you and that particular crime you were just tried for. At that point (for all intense and purposes after a trial with a verdict in most cases) you can never be charged again.Generally the only time you will be charged, have the charges dropped, then recharged later is when the Prosecutor looks at the case the 1st time and tells the Cops “sorry, not enough evidence here for me to take this to trial. Keep digging or forget it”. If they do get better evidence and now the State (prosecutor) are interested (think they can win and not screw up their personal win loss record and chance to be a Judge) then they will “issue” the charges at that time.Generally once a Prosecutor “issues” the charge that will be it for that crime getting charged…win or lose. In rare cases if the Prosecutor gets a hung jury or a mistrial and they think they can really win it ….that the decision was a fluke…then they will in that rare case make the suspect then go through another trial. It is quite rare. Usually in US courts its a 1 shot deal and if they cant get a verdict of guilty the 1st time time they take a hint and decide to protect their all important win loss record rather than do their job and take a shot at getting justice for that victim or whatever.That little secret win loss record I refer to that Prosecutors keep to decide who gets to play Judge and who doesn't has cost many many people their lives.
Can a past murder trial information be used against you if a person is charged in a new case?
Generally they can only be offered as evidence if the defendant takes the stand, or has anyone take the stand to testify as to their good character. I say generally because the evidence can be used to expose a propensity, known by the acronym MIMIC-KOP To show: Motivation to commit the crime Identity of the perpetrator Modus Operandi Intent Common Plan or Scheme, which gives way to: Knowledge Opportunity Preparation These are all mutually exclusive, meaning that the prosecution only needs one to get the past evidence in
U.S. Constitutional Law: If a grand jury decides not to indict a person, can charges be brought against him later for the same crime?
States have different laws regarding when "jeopardy" of conviction attaches. In Missouri it is, by statute, when evidence is presented to a sworn panel of jurors to determine whether or not that evidence is sufficient to justify prosecution for the charges that the prosecutor would like to present further in a full trial. The number of Grand Jurors is different in many states--as is the number of Petit Jurors in a criminal trial. Missouri has 12 people on a Grand Jury, New York has 21, for example. Also, many states allow for a potential defendant to testify before a Grand Jury AS A RIGHT. New York requires a defendant/target to be given the choice of whether or not to testify, while just west of the Hudson River in New Jersey there is no such right. In NY or NJ a "no true bill" finding is NOT final, but new evidence is usually required to re-present to a Grand Jury. However, in some instances, a prosecutor will wait until the previous Grand Jury's term expires and a new group is empaneled and THEN re-present. Also, the requirement of 12 Petit Jurors in a jury trial, that many believe is the law, is not the same in every state: Florida can have as few as 6 jurors in a criminal case, and unanimity required in some states is NOT required everywhere--some states only require a percentage of jurors to establish a conviction or acquittal.
At what point does double jeopardy occur? I was arrested by city police for same charge/incident when I left circuit Court after judge dismissed charges.
Being arrested for an offense is not the triggering event for double jeopardy to attach. For double jeopardy to attach, a generally the offense must be adjudicated to finality (e.g. the judge/jury must render a guilty or not guilty verdict).If your charge was dismissed on a procedural deficiency and without prejudice, if the court declared a mistrial or if your trial ended in a hung jury, your offense was not adjudicated to finality. Therefore you can be re-arrested and re-tried.