IllinoisCaseLaw.com

Home of the Criminal Nuggets Podcast.

Why Do Appellate Court Opinions Finish With A Statement That There Was Sufficient Evidence To Convict?

April 5, 2017 By Arthur McGibbons

People v. Staple, 2016 IL App (4th) 160061 (December). Episode 317 (Duration 21:49)

This case does a great job of digging down into the very basics of double jeopardy.

You Ever Notice…

You ever notice how at the end of a case that has been reversed and remanded for a new trial judges are very careful to include a line that says that Defendant was proven guilty beyond a reasonable doubt.

What’s that all about?

The answer lies in the doctrine of double jeopardy.

Two DUI Charges

The case begins with the fact that the defendant was simultaneously charged with misdemeanor DUI and felony DUI charges exact same course of conduct.

He had both a “DT” file and a “CF” file.

Dismissal

He plead guilty to the misdemeanor and moved the trial court to dismiss the felony charges, claiming double jeopardy had attached when he plead to the misdemeanor.

The trial court granted defendant’s motion to dismiss.

The reviewing court reversed this decision.

Lesser Included

When a defendant pleads guilty to lesser included offenses he has not been exposed to conviction on the charges to which he pleaded not guilty, nor has the State had the opportunity to marshal its evidence and resources more than once or to hone its presentation of its case through a trial.

The acceptance of a guilty plea to lesser included offenses while charges on the greater offenses remain pending, moreover, has none of the implications of an implied acquittal which results from a verdict convicting a defendant on lesser included offenses rendered by a jury charged to consider both greater and lesser included offenses.

There simply isn’t any of the governmental overreaching that double jeopardy is supposed to prevent.

Holding

Defendant was well aware of the pending felony charges when he pleaded guilty to the misdemeanor charges. Additionally, the State has not marshaled its resources and evidence more than once or honed its presentation of the case through a trial on the misdemeanor charges.

Accordingly, the court concluded double jeopardy does not bar the State from pursuing the felony charges that were pending at the time defendant pleaded guilty to the lesser-included misdemeanor charges.

See also the Double Jeopardy Resource Page.

Filed Under: Double Jeopardy, Podcast

Where’s Samuel Partida, Jr.?

Samuel Partida, Jr.Samuel Partida, Jr. is now prosecuting criminal law cases in an Illinois county near you. He is, therefore, unavailable to answer questions on this site. Always remember, there is no substitute for steady, persistent attention to the cases.

FREE SPECIAL REPORT
For Illinois Police Officers & Lawyers.

Free Printed Edition
The Ultimate Police Guide To A Legal Car Search…

Illinois Search & Seizure Guide For Police

Catch Up Quickly With
Everything You Missed
In Car Search Law!

Click here to claim your FREE car search guide.

© 2021 · Steady Persistent Attention To The Cases Is Never Wrong · Disclaimer