Also known as: jeopardy · double jeopardy
Written by attorneys · grounded in primary & secondary sources — see below
The condition of being subject to criminal prosecution and punishment for a particular offense. This status activates constitutional protections that generally bar successive trials for the same crime once jeopardy has attached.
Luis Lopez faced federal charges for a serious environmental crime. Prosecutors sought to proceed without a grand jury indictment. The court required the indictment because the offense carried the risk of imprisonment, placing Lopez in legal jeopardy only after that formal step.
Lila Lin stood trial in federal court for wire fraud. After the jury was empaneled and sworn, the judge declared a mistrial due to prosecutorial error. Lin could not be retried on the same charges because legal jeopardy had already attached.
Layla Lane was acquitted of a felony theft charge after a full trial. The state later attempted to prosecute her for the lesser included offense of receiving stolen property arising from the same incident. The court dismissed the new charge because legal jeopardy from the greater offense already barred it.
Select any source to read its text and confirm it supports the definition.
Logan Lane was tried in state court for robbery after an earlier federal acquittal on identical facts. The state court applied the same double jeopardy bar that governs federal cases and dismissed the prosecution.
Luke Latham faced a state criminal charge after an earlier administrative hearing on the same conduct. Because the first body lacked criminal jurisdiction, the later prosecution proceeded without violating legal jeopardy protections.
Lance Lee received an enhanced sentence in one case based on prior conduct. Prosecutors later filed a separate indictment using that same conduct as the basis for a new charge. The court allowed the indictment because using the conduct only as a sentencing factor had not placed Lee in legal jeopardy for it.
Legal jeopardy attaches when the jury is empaneled and sworn. After that point the defendant receives protection against retrial for the same offense absent manifest necessity or consent.
Supporting sources
Yes. Once jeopardy has attached and the defendant has been prosecuted for the greater offense, the Double Jeopardy Clause bars a later prosecution for a lesser included offense based on the same conduct.
Supporting sources
Yes. The Fifth Amendment Double Jeopardy Clause applies to the states through incorporation into the Fourteenth Amendment, so state prosecutions are subject to the same constitutional bar.
Supporting sources
No. Reversal for legally insufficient evidence is treated as an acquittal that bars retrial under the Double Jeopardy Clause.
Supporting sources
No. Legal jeopardy does not attach in a proceeding before a tribunal without criminal jurisdiction, so a later valid prosecution is not barred.
Supporting sources
…law was to protect the pregnant woman, that is, to restrain her from submitting to a procedure that placed her life in serious jeopardy. Modern medical techniques have altered this situation. Appellants and various amici refer to medical data indicating that abortion in early pregnancy, that is, prior to the end of the…