Constitutional Law: Double Jeopardy: Where Conspiracy To Commit a Crime Is Based on Previously Prosecuted Overt Acts, No Double Jeopardy Violation Exists

• NCJ Number: 155391
• Journal: Mississippi Law Journal Volume: 62 Issue: 1 Dated: (Spring 1992) Pages: 229-243
• Author(s): C Shindala
• Date Published: 1992
• Length: 15 pages
• Publication Format: Article
• Publication Type: Legislation/Policy Analysis
• Language: English
• Country: United States of America

Annotation

In its 1992 decision in United States v. Felix, the United States Supreme Court held that where the jury convicted the defendant of substantive offenses based on certain overt actions, a later prosecution for conspiracy supported by these actions did not create a double jeopardy violation.

Abstract

The Court chose to keep the doctrine separating the conspiracy to commit the crime from the commission of the crime itself, distinct from the line of cases developing various tests to determine when a double jeopardy violation occurs. In doing so, the Court relied solely on the longstanding rule of precedent determining that the conspiracy and the crime are not the same offense for double jeopardy purposes. In contrast, the Court struggles to interpret the relationship between other offenses for double jeopardy purposes through a series of unworkable tests. This result is an inconsistent method of determining which offenses are forbidden from prosecution. These inadequacies will undoubtedly lead to additional double jeopardy conflict requiring resolution by the Supreme Court. Footnotes