Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: Bratch
Illinois’ high court ruled that “rigid, mechanical rules” should not determine whether the Double Jeopardy Clause is violated

WOW! Just damn. I can't fathom how someone, an "educated" person of the law, would just spout something like that as acceptable practice. Liberal truly don't care about the Constitution or this nation's laws unless they suit their needs.

3 posted on 05/29/2014 8:12:36 AM PDT by rarestia (It's time to water the Tree of Liberty.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]


To: rarestia
I think the Illinois court had a point: 'The court held that since the state was not participating in the case, Martinez was “never at risk of conviction.” Thus Martinez was never in jeopardy the first time and so would not suffer double jeopardy by a new trial.'
6 posted on 05/29/2014 8:15:24 AM PDT by ConservingFreedom (A goverrnment strong enough to impose your standards is strong enough to ban them.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies ]

To: rarestia
Illinois’ high court ruled that “rigid, mechanical rules” should not determine whether the Double Jeopardy Clause is violated.

that stood out to me too! rigid, mechanical rules are exactly what should determine whether the Double Jeopardy Clause is violated or not... can you imagine? sheesh!

24 posted on 05/29/2014 9:04:33 AM PDT by latina4dubya (when i have money i buy books... if i have anything left, i buy 6-inch heels and a bottle of wine...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson