Posted on 01/13/2025 12:30:13 PM PST by algore
Imagine you’ve had some trouble with the state police during a traffic stop search, but after years of legal fees and time in court rooms, you’ve finally plead the charges down to one year in prison and nine years of probation. But the day you get out your lawyer tells you the feds hit you with a charge—for the exact same crime. Suddenly, you’re facing years in prison all over again. That’s double jeopardy, and the Supreme Court says it’s here to stay.
Terrence Gamble’s double jeopardy nightmare Take the case of Terrence Gamble. Police in Alabama pulled him over for a broken headlight. They claimed they smelled marijuana and searched his car. They found two bags of weed and a gun. Because of a prior conviction, Gamble was charged with a felony weapons violation. He took a plea deal—10 years probation and one year in jail. But then the feds came knocking.
Attorney Jeff Hampton explains, “Because of Terrence’s prior plea in state court, the feds could use it against him in federal court.” Gamble had no choice but to take another plea deal. This time, he got three more years in prison—for the same crime.
“This loophole allows both prosecutors and police to exploit this,” Hampton says. Critics argue it’s unfair, but the Supreme Court says it’s legal.
The double jeopardy loophole explained The Fifth Amendment is clear. It says no one “shall be subject for the same offense to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb.” But a loophole lets police and prosecutors work around this protection.
Hampton breaks it down: “There is a federal government and there is a state government and they are seen as separate sovereigns.” Because of this, “they can try to throw the book at you for the same crime in different courtrooms.”
He explains how it works. “State prosecutors pick up the phone. They call the federal prosecutor right across the street and start talking about your case.” If the state loses, “the feds still have an opportunity to bring another charge against the same person for the same offense.”
Hampton says this is not just a rare loophole—it’s a tool prosecutors use. “Both state and federal prosecutors will coordinate together on higher profile cases knowing that if they lose on the first round in state court, they have a second bite at the apple in federal court.”
And it’s not going away anytime soon. Hampton explains, “The Supreme Court ruled that a crime against two sovereigns constitutes two offenses because each sovereign has an interest to vindicate.”
I think the founders weren’t thinking that the states would have laws duplicating the feds or vice versa.
Feds would have their law, which under the constitution is “the law of the land”, not just D.C..
Everything else is left to the states or the people via the 10th amendment.
So if congress acted true to the constitution, when a fed makes a law, it preempts state laws and if they happened to have already existed, they would have their jurisdiction assumed.
As such, you wouldn’t have the current day overlap and no occasion for this type of “double jeopardy”.
“…two sovereigns constitutes two offenses because each sovereign has an interest to vindicate.”
Yeah but the double jeopardy clause refers to a single individual not being subject twice to the same charges. Also I read somewhere that if the Feds try you and fail to convict, double jeopardy then DOES kick in and the state can’t try you. Where is the double sovereign there?
You just quoted the key language. “same offense”. The federal law creates a different offense than the state offense. One is an offense against the state, or the people of the state, or some other language limited to the state, the other is an offense against the United States.
I know you Big Government unionists are against State’s Rights and the ideals of the founding fathers, but there are a few places where the separation between the power of the states and the power of Washington are still alive.
And don’t forget those situations where two different states might be able to try a defendant for a single act. Again, two sovereigns, no double jeopardy
So the fed’s are traffic enforcers as well?
What about the eighth amendment right against cruel and unusual punishment?
Or the 10th Amendment limiting the reach of the Federal Government to what is specified in the constitution?
The Feds should be involved only when the crime goes beyond state lines.
An offense is a single action committed by an individual. They seem to be saying that the number of witnesses determines the number of transgressions.
When the result is this wrong, there’s something wrong in the system. Maybe there was a technical misstep by his lawyers?
The best course of action is to not have weed and a gun in your car when you are out and about!
Don’t do the crime, you won’t get the time. Unless you’re a conservative in a rat state, that is.
On the bright side, Joe can pardon members of the corrupt Deep State, but there are states that incorporate Federal RICO statutes into state criminal laws. Georgia and Florida are two of those states.
Plus the Feds call drugs plus a gun fortressing and they nail you to the wall for it.
So keep your self
As Tight as Possible!
Don’t do the crime—💫
Or FIX the Broken Headlight!
That, too!
HST, crooks, thugs, criminals and their ilk aren’t known for their common sense.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.