Sentencing and Punishment Flashcards
T/F: Jeopardy attaches in a jury trial at the empaneling and swearing of the jury.
True.
T/F: Jeopardy attaches in a bench trial when the first witness is sworn.
True.
When is re-trial permitted even if jeopardy has attached?
(a) D’s first trial ended in a hung jury
(b) trial may be discontinued and D re-prosecuted for same offense when there is manifest necessity to abort the original trial or when termination occurs because of D
(c) may retry D who successfully appealed a conviction (issue is weight, not sufficiency of evidence)
(d) charges reinstated after D breaches plea bargain
(e) D elected to have offenses tried separately when they could have been tried together
T/F: Separate sovereigns can try D for same offense.
True. Separate sovereigns = state vs federal governments or FL vs TX
T/F: Even if two crimes constitute the same offense, multiple punishments are permissible if there was a legislative intent to have the cumulative punishments.
True. e.g. anti-trafficking statute adds extra offense to a D who is guilty of another offense with the same elements
A woman was the subject of a murder investigation. The investigation continued for 2+ years, with the woman frequently being called in for questioning. Finally, the woman was indicted for the murder. The woman’s lawyer filed a motion to dismiss all charges against her, arguing that the excessively long investigatory period violated the woman’s constitutional right to a speedy trial.
Despite the pending motion, the woman decided that she wanted to “get it over with,” and she told the judge that she wished to plead guilty. The judge then explained the charges to the woman and asked her if she understood them. She replied, “Yes.” The judge then asked the woman if she understood that she was not required to plead guilty. She responded in the affirmative. Finally, the judge described the maximum sentence and asked the woman if she understood that she could receive the maximum sentence, which was life imprisonment. She again responded, “Yes,” and maintained that she still wished to plead guilty. The judge accepted the woman’s plea and sentenced her to 30 years’ imprisonment in the state penitentiary. Six months later, the woman filed a motion to set aside the guilty plea.
Which of the following provides the best argument that the woman has a constitutional basis for relief?
A - judge did not rule on the pending motion to dismiss before accepting her guilty plea.
B - judge did not attempt to determine if the woman had actually committed the murder.
C - judge did not determine whether the files in the prosecutor’s office contained any undisclosed exculpatory evidence.
D - judge did not determine whether the woman understood that she had a right to a trial by jury.
The judge’s failure to determine whether the woman understood her right to trial by jury indicates that her guilty plea does not satisfy the constitutional requirement that it be “voluntary and intelligent.” A guilty plea is a waiver of the 6th Amend right to a jury trial.
To be a valid waiver, the judge must determine on the record that the guilty plea represents a voluntary and intelligent choice among the alternative courses of action open to D. Judge should make sure that D is informed of the nature of the charge to which the plea is offered, of the maximum possible penalty, that she has a right not to plead guilty, and that by pleading guilty she waives her right to a trial. If the judge did not determine whether the woman understood that she had a right to a trial by jury, her plea will not be a sufficiently intelligent choice to satisfy the constitutional standard, and therefore will not be immune from a post-sentence attack on it.
At the defendant’s trial for murder, facts were introduced that the defendant acted in the heat of passion. After a lengthy trial, the defendant was convicted of manslaughter. On appeal, the conviction was reversed on procedural grounds. The state immediately moved to retry the defendant, again bringing murder charges against her. The defendant moved to strike the murder charge, and the court refused to grant the motion. After the second trial, the defendant was again convicted of the lesser charge of manslaughter. The defendant appeals the second conviction, claiming that it violated her constitutional rights.
May the second conviction stand?
The second conviction will not stand. The Double Jeopardy Clause prohibits retrying Dwhose conviction has been reversed on appeal for any offense more serious than that for which she was convicted at the first trial. This right is violated by retrial for a more serious offense, even if at the second trial the defendant is only convicted of an offense no more serious than that for which she was convicted at the first trial.
