DOUBLE JEOPARDY LIMITATIONS ON APPEALS BY THE GOVERNMENT IN CRIMINAL CASES

• NCJ Number: 34687
• Journal: Dickinson Law Review Volume: 80 Issue: 3 Dated: (SPRING 1976) Pages: 525-546
• Author(s): R L LACKEY
• Date Published: 1976
• Length: 22 pages
• Corporate Author: Dickinson School of Law
• Publication Format: Article
• Language: English
• Country: United States of America

Annotation

REVIEW OF THREE SUPREME COURT DECISIONS DEFINING THE CONSTITUTIONALLY IMPOSED DOUBLE JEOPARDY LIMITS ON STATE AND FEDERAL GOVERNMENT APPEALS IN CRIMINAL CASES.

Abstract

THE DOUBLE JEOPARDY TRILOGY INCLUDES THE RULINGS IN UNITED STATES V WILSON (1975), UNITED STATES V JENKINS (1975), AND SERFASS V UNITED STATES (1975). WILSON, JENKINS, AND SERFASS ACCOMPLISHED MUCH OF THE TASK OF DEFINING THE BREADTH OF GOVERNMENT APPEAL RIGHTS IN CRIMINAL CASES. INCLUDED AMONG THE RULINGS ARE THAT THE PROSECUTION CAN APPEAL FROM TERMINATION IN FAVOR OF THE DEFENDANT WHEN A FINDING OF GUILT THAT CAN BE REINSTATED EXISTS IN EITHER JURY OR BENCH TRIAL; APPEAL IS BARRED FROM JURY ACQUITTALS AND DETERMINATIONS OF FACTUAL INNOCENCE BY A TRIAL JUDGE. ALL TERMINATIONS IN FAVOR OF THE DEFENDANT THAT OCCUR PRIOR TO IMPANELMENT OF THE JURY OR BEFORE THE COURT BEGINS TO HEAR EVIDENCE IN A BENCH TRIAL ARE SUBJECT TO APPEAL. THE AUTHOR STATES THAT WIDESPREAD CONSIDERATION OF THE TRILOGY IN THE TRIAL COURTS WILL ELIMINATE WASTE AND INJUSTICE THAT RESULT FROM TERMINATION OF TRIALS BY UNREVIEWABLE RULINGS FOUNDED ON MISCONCEPTIONS OF LAW.