Untangling Double Jeopardy in Mixed-Verdict Cases

Southern Methodist University Law Review, Vol. 63, 2010

32 Pages Posted: 18 May 2010

See all articles by Lissa Griffin

Lissa Griffin

Pace University School of Law

Date Written: 2010

Abstract

This Article attempts to describe and untangle the confusion leading up to and resulting from the Yeager decision. In Part II it examines the four distinct double jeopardy areas presented in Yeager, with particular emphasis on the two conflicting precedents of collateral estoppel and the non-finality of a hung jury. Part III closely examines the Yeager decision itself. Part IV analyzes Yeager in light of its tangled doctrinal history and places it in the context of the Court’s several other short-lived and rapidly reversed precedents. The article concludes that the Court’s holding is neither justified by its precedent nor adequately explained. By failing to justify the extensive departures from its double jeopardy precedent – greatly extending Ashe and severely narrowing Richardson – the Yeager Court further tangled its doctrinal Sargasso Sea.

Suggested Citation

Griffin, Lissa, Untangling Double Jeopardy in Mixed-Verdict Cases (2010). Southern Methodist University Law Review, Vol. 63, 2010 , Available at SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=1611369

Lissa Griffin (Contact Author)

Pace University School of Law ( email )

78 North Broadway
White Plains, NY 10603
United States
914-422-4231 (Phone)

HOME PAGE: http://www.pace.edu/page.cfm?doc_id=23170

Do you have a job opening that you would like to promote on SSRN?

Paper statistics

Downloads
34
Abstract Views
509
PlumX Metrics