[AnotherUnixGeek]

No. Stone was convicted on federal charges. They're talking about trying Stone for state witness tampering charges. Different law, different crime, double jeopardy doesn't exist.

But why would a new New York law, this AB6653 mentioned in the article, be required to charge Stone with some different violation? The article states that the law is specifically targeted at those who have received presidential pardons for federal crimes.

[DoodleDawg]

But why would a new New York law, this AB6653 mentioned in the article, be required to charge Stone with some different violation?

Because the state used to waive prosecution for people convicted on similar federal charges. This law changed that. And no, it's not a ex post facto law. Witness tampering has always been illegal.