Brief filed: 10/07/2013
Documents
Carpenter v. United States
United States Supreme Court; Case No. 13-291
Prior Decision
Decision below (unreported) Order of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the First Circuit, United States v. Carpenter, Nos. 11-2131, -2133 (1st Cir. May 3, 2013).
Question Presented
Whether the prosecution, consistent with the protections of the Double Jeopardy Clause, can effectively foreclose the termination of “original jeopardy” by obtaining a guilty verdict through advancing improper arguments and, once a new trial is granted, retry the accused before he can obtain appellate review of the sufficiency of the evidence at the initial trial.
Argument(s)
Richardson does not apply when the jury reaches a verdict after the prosecution had a full opportunity to present its case. Yeager confirms that Richardson should not be applied categorically. Rote extension of Richardson offends the original understanding of the collateral order doctrine.
Author(s)
Jeffrey T. Green and Emily C. Watkins, Sidley Austin LLP, Washington, DC; Jonathan Hacker, Washington, DC; Sarah O’Rourke Schrup, Northwestern University Supreme Court Practicum, Chicago, IL.