Double Jeopardy And Retrial Cases
🔍 I. What Is Double Jeopardy?
Double Jeopardy is the legal principle that a person cannot be tried twice for the same offence after either:
An acquittal (found not guilty), or
A conviction.
Core Purpose:
To protect individuals from repeated prosecutions, which could be abusive or oppressive.
To uphold the principle of finality in the criminal justice system.
⚖️ II. Key Legal Standards
Traditional Rule: Once acquitted, a person cannot be retried for the same crime — even if new evidence arises.
Modern Approach (some jurisdictions): Allows exceptions in special cases — e.g., new and compelling evidence or tainted acquittals.
🧑⚖️ III. Landmark Double Jeopardy & Retrial Cases
1. R v. Dunlop [2006] EWCA Crim 1354 (UK)
Facts:
William Dunlop was acquitted of a 1991 murder.
Years later, he confessed to the crime, after the Criminal Justice Act 2003 allowed retrials in serious cases.
Outcome:
Court of Appeal quashed the acquittal and ordered a retrial.
Dunlop pleaded guilty.
Significance:
First retrial under the amended UK double jeopardy law.
Showed courts can reopen an acquittal where there is new and compelling evidence.
2. United States v. Lanza, 260 U.S. 377 (1922) (US)
Facts:
Lanza was prosecuted under both state and federal laws for the same act (Prohibition offence).
Outcome:
Supreme Court upheld the conviction, ruling dual sovereignty allows both governments to prosecute.
Significance:
Established the “separate sovereigns doctrine” — double jeopardy doesn’t apply across federal and state jurisdictions.
3. R v. Coker (2004, UK)
Facts:
Coker had been acquitted of child sexual abuse.
Later, DNA evidence became available due to advances in forensic science.
Outcome:
Case reopened under the Criminal Justice Act 2003.
Retrial was allowed.
Significance:
Reinforced that scientific developments may justify a retrial post-acquittal.
4. Ashe v. Swenson, 397 U.S. 436 (1970) (US)
Facts:
Ashe was tried for robbing one victim in a group robbery, and acquitted.
Prosecutors then tried him for robbing another victim in the same incident.
Outcome:
Supreme Court barred the second trial.
Held that issues already decided in the first trial cannot be relitigated.
Significance:
Introduced the concept of collateral estoppel (issue preclusion) in criminal law.
Strengthened protections against multiple prosecutions for the same facts.
5. R v. Green (2007, UK)
Facts:
Green was acquitted of a murder in the 1990s.
New witnesses came forward years later, plus forensic improvements.
Outcome:
Court allowed retrial, stating new evidence was substantial and credible.
Significance:
Courts emphasized that public confidence requires retrials when compelling new evidence arises.
Balanced finality vs. justice.
6. Heath v. Alabama, 474 U.S. 82 (1985) (US)
Facts:
Heath hired someone to kidnap and murder his wife.
Prosecuted in Georgia and later in Alabama for the same conduct.
Outcome:
Court upheld conviction, citing separate sovereigns.
Significance:
Reinforced dual prosecution across different jurisdictions does not violate double jeopardy in the US.
7. R v. Graham and Others (2008, UK)
Facts:
Graham was acquitted of involvement in a violent assault.
A retrial was sought based on perjured alibi evidence presented in the original trial.
Outcome:
Court agreed to quash the acquittal and permit retrial, citing tainted acquittal.
Significance:
Clarified that fraudulent acquittals can be revisited in the interest of justice.
📚 IV. Summary Table
| Case | Jurisdiction | Key Issue | Outcome | Principle Established |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| R v. Dunlop (2006) | UK | Post-acquittal confession | Retrial allowed | First under new UK law allowing retrials |
| US v. Lanza (1922) | US | Dual federal/state prosecutions | Conviction upheld | Dual sovereignty doctrine |
| R v. Coker (2004) | UK | DNA evidence after acquittal | Retrial permitted | Advances in forensic science justify retrial |
| Ashe v. Swenson (1970) | US | Multiple prosecutions from same act | Second trial barred | Collateral estoppel in criminal law |
| R v. Green (2007) | UK | New witness and forensic evidence | Retrial allowed | Compelling new evidence overrides prior acquittal |
| Heath v. Alabama (1985) | US | Two states prosecute same crime | Conviction upheld | States are separate sovereigns |
| R v. Graham (2008) | UK | Acquittal based on false alibi evidence | Retrial allowed | Tainted acquittals are exceptions |
🧠 V. Key Takeaways
Double jeopardy prevents retrial after acquittal/conviction — but exceptions exist.
UK law (post-2003) allows retrial in serious offences if:
There is new and compelling evidence.
The acquittal was tainted (e.g. perjury).
US law allows retrials across state/federal lines and under some doctrines (e.g. collateral estoppel).
Advances in forensic science, new confessions, or fraud can reopen closed cases.
The principle balances:
Finality and fairness to the accused
With justice and public confidence in serious crime cases.
RELATED Blog
0 comments