Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
We have, in our constitution, a protection against double jeopardy, where you cannot be put on trial for the same crime more than once. But it seems that states seem to get around this by using the appeals process to appeal the verdict in a case.
For example, if someone is found innocent because a statute is declared unconstitutional by a lower court, the state can then appeal the ruling to a higher court, thereby placing the individual in jeopardy again for the same offense.
I think the appeals process should be limited only to the defendants. People are innocent until proven guilty, but if found guilty in a court, should be given opportunity to prove their innocence. States should never be given more than ONE opportunity to prove guilt. They can't prove it the first time, they should not have another chance.
The state was denied that power, because the state was granted the power to initiate the proceeding in the first place. If the state drags your butt into court and forces you to defend yourself at your own cost, they only get one shot and they have to do it right the first time. They don't get to keep trying over and over again. Bad enough that, if they fail the first time, they don't even have to say they're sorry, much less reimburse you for any losses sustained in your effort to prove your innocence against the groundless accusations.
The state was denied that power, because the state was granted the power to initiate the proceeding in the first place. If the state drags your butt into court and forces you to defend yourself at your own cost, they only get one shot and they have to do it right the first time. They don't get to keep trying over and over again. Bad enough that, if they fail the first time, they don't even have to say they're sorry, much less reimburse you for any losses sustained in your effort to prove your innocence against the groundless accusations.
I agree, this is how it should be. But there are cases where the accused was found innocent because the law was deemed unconstitutional. The state was able to appeal the ruling and the individual who was found innocent is guilty again.
I personally don't think that should be allowed to happen. I do not think governments should have the right to appeal ANY decision by a court.
An appeal is not putting you in double jeopardy. An appeal is generally based on a specific question of law. An appeal is not a new jury trial. At times it may result in a new jury trial if on appeal it turns out that an error in law may have affected the outcome of the trial. A party in a case cannot "get another shot" through an appeal. The party has to perfect the right to appeal during the trial, basically calling the court on the error contemporaneously. Whether or not the system should work the way it does from a moral basis is obviously a very worthwhile debate, but an appeal does not violate the prohibition on double jeopardy.
An appeal is not putting you in double jeopardy. An appeal is generally based on a specific question of law. An appeal is not a new jury trial. At times it may result in a new jury trial if on appeal it turns out that an error in law may have affected the outcome of the trial. A party in a case cannot "get another shot" through an appeal. The party has to perfect the right to appeal during the trial, basically calling the court on the error contemporaneously. Whether or not the system should work the way it does from a moral basis is obviously a very worthwhile debate, but an appeal does not violate the prohibition on double jeopardy.
So as an example. If someone is arrested for picking his nose in public, and the court finds the law unconstitutional, he should be free to go, right?
However, if the DA appeals the case to a higher court, and the higher court finds that the law was in fact constitutional, does that mean our nose picking friend is still free to go, or is he a second time put in jeopardy of life, liberty, or property?
It's a legal question that depends on when jeopardy attaches.
If the trial court makes a pretrial ruling based on the law (for instance, suppressing evidence because of an illegal search) the state has the ability to appeal that ruling.
On the other hand, once there has been a trial any appeal by the state would involve a second trial for the same offense, and that is prohibited by the constitution.
Trial courts don't find laws unConstitutional, that's the job of the Supreme Court. Trial lawyers will oftimes raise Constitutional questions (such as proper Mirandazation) which the trial judge rules on. Appeals courts rule on the procedures of the trial courts. Sometimes their rulings will uncover a Constitutional question which then gets kicked up to the Supreme Court.
MD has a process where the State's Attorney (DA) can appeal to the MD Court of Special Appeals (#2 in line from the top) or MD Court of Appeals (#1) in very specific and narrow circumstances that usually involve a Circuit Court Judge's ruling in a trial.
No;because of teh power of teh federal government. e alreqady have enohg abuse such as Switser who hounded amny until the plea to a deal. He only went to trial one time and loss.We need to loo more casrefully now the practiuce of prosecution is used many times
Trial courts don't find laws unConstitutional, that's the job of the Supreme Court.
Federal trial courts rule on Constitutional issues all the time, the final arbiter is the Supreme Court but as you know all issues of constitutionality do not merit Supreme Court review.
The constitutiopn alwasy protects the individual against the powrs of teh governamnt rememeber.Merit is more like what they want to hear. I woud guaranteee they would fi such a case was ruled on changing the current law.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
