Describe The Double Jeopardy Clause In Detail.
Double jeopardy is criminal law protection, which is derived from the fifth amendments, and it comprises of the original bills of rights. It describes the rights against self-incrimination, and its guarantee of the due process from the federal government. Under jeopardy clause, it is not possible for a criminal to be put on trial for the same crime twice (Gardner, & Anderson, 2015). The clauses state “…nor shall any person be subjected for the same offence to be put in jeopardy of life or limb…” therefore, the government is prohibited from subjecting on trial from the same crime twice. The following are instances when double jeopardy does not apply: appealing a sentence, hung the jury, and other mistrials and after a defendant successfully appeals (Pamenter, 2014; Barry, 2012).
How Does The Protection Of The 5th Amendment Vary From Dual Sovereignty Doctrine?
According to Adler, (2014), dual sovereign doctrine, it permits sequential prosecution from the same course of conduct by discrete sovereigns whose power to penalize a lawbreaker originates from “distinct sources of powers.” This doctrine has been applied in various situations by the state and federal governments, and they have prosecuted defendants on charges arising from the same act (Principato, 2014). On the other hand, the Fifth Amendment protects criminals from being put in trails from the same crime twice.
Delegate your assignment to our experts and they will do the rest.
Examples of Dual Sovereignty Doctrine
Dual sovereignty doctrine can be followed when a person commits a kidnapping involving two states. Such an individual can be charged, convicted and punished three times using the dual sovereignty doctrine (Principato, 2014). First, each state can use their laws and punish the criminal then the federal government can also induce their punishments. Hence, it is found that a criminal is punished thrice for the same offence (Principato, 2014).
References
Adler, A. J. (2014). Dual Sovereignty, Due Process, and Duplicative Punishment: A New Solution to an Old Problem. Yale LJ , 124 , 448.
Barry, J. M. (2012). Prosecuting the exonerated: actual innocence and the double jeopardy clause. Stanford Law Review , 535-588.
Gardner, T. J., & Anderson, T. M. (2015). Criminal evidence: Principles and cases . Nelson Education.
Pamenter, K. A. (2014). United States v. Dixon: The Supreme Court Returns to the Traditional Standard for Double Jeopardy Clause Analysis. Notre Dame Law Review , 69 (3), 575.
Principato, D. A. (2014). Defining the Sovereign in Dual Sovereignty: Does the Protection against Double Jeopardy Bar Successive Prosecutions in National and International Courts. Cornell Int'l LJ , 47 , 767.
