Posted on 06/22/2022 12:43:06 PM PDT by Michael.SF.
The federal government prosecuted Merle Denezpi twice for the same crime. It also punished him twice: the first time with 140 days in a federal detention center, the second time with a prison sentence more than 70 times as long.
Although that may seem like an obvious violation of the Fifth Amendment's ban on double jeopardy, the Supreme Court last week ruled that it wasn't. As the six justices in the majority saw it, that puzzling conclusion was the logical result of the Court's counterintuitive precedents on this subject.
The Fifth Amendment says no person shall "be subject for the same offence to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb." But under the Court's longstanding "dual sovereignty" doctrine, an offense is not "the same" when it is criminalized by two different governments.
That doctrine allows serial state and federal prosecutions for the same crime, opening the door to double punishment or a second trial after an acquittal. Although neither seems just, the Court says both are perfectly constitutional.
The justices reaffirmed that view in a 2019 case involving a man with a felony record who was convicted twice and punished twice for illegally possessing a gun -- first in state court, then in federal court. Although the elements of the crime were the same in both cases, the majority said, the two prosecutions did not amount to double jeopardy because they involved two different "sovereigns."
(Excerpt) Read more at townhall.com ...
“The Constitution never gave the Federal government police powers.”
Tell that to the FBI.
In any event, there are state actions and federal actions; the state pursues those that fall under state jurisdiction and the feds pursue those that fall under federal jurisdiction.
Easily fixed. If a state can prosecute, the feds should not. Eliminate any federal law that is already covered by state laws or jurisdictions.
“Ditto OJ Simpson, sued for wrongful death in civil court after his acquittal in the criminal trial.”
The Simpson case involves civil and criminal trials. The burden of proof for civil cases is lower, hence the different verdicts.
“for the same offence to be twice”
Tohmaytoe-Tomaahtoe
Pohtaytoe-Potaahtoe
Theft vs Robbery
State vs Federal
Why not Hamlet vs Village vs Town vs City vs County vs . . .
Just keep making shiiite up til you can imprison everybody.
The problem with your reasoning is the 10th Amendment. If a state is allowed to prosecute a specific crime, then the Feds shouldn't be involved in any manner.
Not quite. The conviction was in a special federal court that administers triable law where there is no tribal court. The second trial was in a federal district court. The prosecutor was the same in both cases and elements of the crime were the same in each case. Basically, the same federal prosecuted prosecuted the same person for the same crime in a federal court.
The United States is made up of 50 sovereign states. A conviction in one state for a specific act or crime should act as a bar to all other states and the federal government. And a conviction in federal court would be a a conviction by all states.
Easy way to nail political prisoners.
And this ruling is why the States should have much more power than the fed gov. No reason to punish folks twice.
Under the Constitution the Federal Government is subservient to the states. The Federal government is a creation of the states. And no, you don’t have two separate governments charging you. You have THE government charging you. There may be two venues, but there is only one government.
That’s the problem with federal overreach.
So, you could be accused of the same crime by your local HOA, township, county, city, state, the feds, a couple of whatever fed and state taxing districts, etc. all for the same crime of jaywalking?
Sounds like double Jeopardy to me too.
I think there should be coordination between the two sovereigns. Either the Feds prosecute or the state prosecutes but not both.
Save thing with civil courts vs Criminal courts. When it involves a crime, I don’t think there should be a lower standard for civil action than criminal action. No conviction for the crime should me no civil action.
That’s how I see hate crimes - an excuse for double-jeopardy. An excuse to persecute “non-minorities”.
- World Court prosecution.
- Federal US Court prosecution.
- State Court prosecution.
- County Court prosecution.
- City Court prosecution.
- Precinct Court prosecution.
I mean hell, we GOTTA be able to nail someone with six seperate prosecutions!!!!
I'd agree but I would say it about PROSECUTIONS, not CONVICTIONS.
Have we figured out yet that the US Constitition does not exist or is never enforced except when those in power demand it be enforced?
BARRETT, J., delivered the opinion of the Court, in which ROBERTS,
C. J., and THOMAS, BREYER, ALITO, and KAVANAUGH, JJ., joined. GOR-
SUCH, J., filed a dissenting opinion, in which SOTOMAYOR and KAGAN, JJ.,
joined as to Parts I and III. https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&url=https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/21pdf/20-7622_ljgm.pdf&ved=2ahUKEwizvdex-8H4AhXEATQIHUNCBPsQFnoECAUQAQ&usg=AOvVaw0UKjaiVvewU2yBkKbsDms9
The USSC has toilet paper in their bathrooms that has the constitution printed on it.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.