It provides three types of constitutional protections: protection against a second criminal prosecution after acquittal for the same offense, protection against a subsequent prosecution for the same offense after conviction and protection against multiple punishments for the same offense. Thus, the Clause ensures that the prosecuted is protected under US law. This clause is said to be one of the least understood amendments made to the Bill of Rights. This is especially because the Supreme Court has done precious little to remove any of the confusions that might have occurred.
The simplicity of this clause is the root behind all the confusion and the clause’s application. As stated by Justice McKay the same offense clause creates the “the most vehement disagreement among the Justice” (1983) To do the Court justice this is also because there were rarely any jeopardy cases that occurred before 1969. However when Benton v Maryland took place, it was decided that this amendment would be incorporated onto the Fourteenth Amendment making the clause compulsory on state and federal governments.
(Holmes 1991). One of the recognized and remembered cases created by the Double Jeopardy Clause occurred in 1990 in the Grady v Corbin case. The case involved Corbin who was driving under influence on the New York Highway. This state caused him to crash into two oncoming vehicles. The woman in the second vehicle died in this accident while her husband was seriously injured. On the same day, Corbin pleaded guilty for driving under influence and was charged with this offence. The Supreme Court ruled that charging him for homicide now would just result in a contradiction of the double jeopardy clause.
Thus, it was ruled that a subsequent prosecution would be barred if the essential elements of the prosecution had already been charged and the defendant has already been prosecuted (US Supreme Court Center). The double jeopardy clause prevents state and federal authorities from
...Download file to see next pages Read More