Lisa Winnett

!
!

Double Jeopardy

United States Code Annotated - Constitution of the United States

Amendment V. Double Jeopardy
In applying dual sovereignty doctrine as relating to the double jeopardy clause,
crucial determination is whether the two entities that seek successively to
prosecute a defendant for same course of conduct can be termed separate
sovereigns; this determination turns on whether the two entities draw their
authority to punish offender from distinct sources of power.

American Jurisprudence 2d Criminal Law

321. Generally; dual sovereignty doctrine
Prosecutions under the laws of separate sovereigns do not subject a defendant
to double jeopardy. Indeed, two separate sovereigns can bring successive
prosecutions for the same criminal acts without offending the due process clause
of the Fifth Amendment. In other words, the double jeopardy clause does not
preclude multiple convictions in different sovereign jurisdictions for the same
criminal act.
As stated in the law that a defendant can be charged for the same crime in 2 different
locations as long as there are 2 different governing authorities. Therefore, Libby
Parsons would not be able to use the Double Jeopardy clause of the 5th Amendment
in this case.
Louisiana Code of Criminal Procedure
Art. 596. Requirements for double jeopardy
Double jeopardy exists in a second trial only when the charge in that trial is:
(1) Identical with or a different grade of the same offense for which the
defendant was in jeopardy in the first trial, whether or not a responsive
verdict could have been rendered in the first trial as to the charge in the
second trial; or
(2) Based on a part of a continuous offense for which offense the defendant
was in jeopardy in the first trial.

!
!

In this Article, I wonder if Libby might have a little bit of a cause using the first
requirement for Double jeopardy. It is an identical crime as far as Murdering her
husband nick for the second time, and if all the evidence was correct in the first trial (i.e.
they found that Nick was not murdered) she wouldnt have been convicted in the first
Lisa Winnett !

Double Jeopardy

place. Since she has been convicted and served the time for a false crime then could
she claim Double jeopardy the second time around?

!
!

Louisiana Code of Criminal Procedure

Art. 597. Prosecution in other jurisdiction
Double jeopardy does not apply to a prosecution under a law enacted by the
Louisiana Legislature if the prior jeopardy was in a prosecution under the laws of
another state or the United States.

This article hurts Libbys case of Double Jeopardy because it was originally tried in the
state of Washington.

Washington Criminal Practice & Procedure 2107 (3d ed.)

2107. Double jeopardy
In order for a former conviction or acquittal to be a bar or defense to the
jeopardy in which the defendant has been placed by the present prosecution, the
offenses charged in both prosecutions must be the same. Washington follows the
same evidence rule rather than the same incident rule to determine whether
double jeopardy has attached. For purposes of determining double jeopardy,
offenses are not the same if there is an element in each which is not included in
the other, and proof of one offense would not necessarily also prove the other.
Nevertheless, where the defendant's acts constitute just one unit of
prosecution, double jeopardy prevents multiple prosecutions for the related acts.

I think that based on this code Libby might have a defense for double jeopardy based
on the same evidence rule. The evidence is the same in the fact that Libby murdered
her husband Nick in both events.

Revised Code of Washington Annotated

10.43.040. Foreign conviction or acquittal
Whenever, upon the trial of any person for a crime, it appears that the offense
was committed in another state or country, under such circumstances that the
courts of this state had jurisdiction thereof, and that the defendant has already
been acquitted or convicted upon the merits, in a judicial proceeding conducted
under the criminal laws of such state or country, founded upon the act or
omission with respect to which he or she is upon trial, such former acquittal or
conviction is a sufficient defense. Nothing in this section affects or prevents a
prosecution in a court of this state of any person who has received administrative

Lisa Winnett !

Double Jeopardy

or nonjudicial punishment, civilian or military, in another state or country based

upon the same act or omission.

This code the State of Washington states that they can still prosecute someone that has
been tried in another state, so this would hurt Libbys case of Double Jeopardy.

Larry Gene HEATH, Petitioner v. ALABAMA.

474 U.S. 82
(1985)
In Heath v. Alabama, the defendant hired 2 men to kill his wife. He arranged to have her
kidnapped from her home in Alabama, and later killed in the state of Georgia. The
Supreme Court affirmed the lower courts decision that Heath can be tired in 2 different
states based on the same murder that took place first in Alabama with the kidnaping
and then the murder in Georgia.
The facts in this case would probably hurt Libby Parsons claim of Double Jeopardy,
because the court held the separate jurisdictions could prosecute for the same crime.

STATE v. Marcos RODRIGUEZ.

917 A2d. 409
R.I. (2007).

This case is similar to the Heath v. Alabama case. Rodriguez kidnapped an another
man in the State of Rhode Island and later he was found murdered in the state of New
York. The court decision is that Mr. Rodriguez can be tried in 2 different states based on
the same murder that took place first with the kidnaping in Rhode island and then for the
actual murder that took place in New York.
This case also ruled against the double jeopardy clause based on different jurisdictions,
therefore, it would not help Libby Parsons case.

State v. Mew
675 So.2d 843
La.App. 4 Cir. (1996).

In this case Michelle Mew was charged in Florida for grand thief, then drove the vehicle
to Louisiana where the defendant , was also charged for Grand thief. This case is an
example of the dual sovereignty law. Therefore, because both states have jurisdiction,
this case would not help Libbys Double jeopardy case.

Lisa Winnett !

Double Jeopardy

Matter of Wiley v. Altman

52 N.Y.2d 410, 420 N.E.2d 371
N.Y. (1981).
In this case the defendants entered an agreement to have the victim killed. They were
charged in Maryland on conspiracy to commit murder. Then later charged in New York
for committing murder. These cases did not fall under the Double Jeopardy clause
because one state charged them for conspiracy and another state charged them for
murder. Once, again Double Jeopardy is not a valid case in this situation do to the
separate jurisdictions that the crimes were committed.
State v. Henwood
243 Kan. 326, 756 P.2d 1087
Kan. (1988).
The defendant was charged with thief of a 1979 Chevrolet Monte Carlo, in Missouri. The
next day the defendant was charged with thief of the same vehicle in Kansas. Kansas
had concurrent jurisdiction over crime prosecuted in Missouri and thus, defendant
could not be prosecuted for crime in Kansas under statute which barred prosecution if
defendant was formally prosecuted in sister state; both states possessed jurisdiction
over subject matter of controversy and either court would have been proper forum for its
resolution.
Libby might have a chance to claim double jeopardy if the 2 crimes were committed in
concurrent Jurisdictions, but since this is not the case here, she will have a much
harder time providing a defense.

Conclusion
Does Double Jeopardy provide a valid defense for Libby Parsons? Based on the facts
in her case, I dont think that Libby can claim double jeopardy. The Criminal law states
two separate sovereigns can bring successive prosecutions for the same criminal acts
without offending the due process clause of the Fifth Amendment. Therefore, since the
original crime was committed in Washington State of murdering her husband, then 6
years later she committed the same crime (murdering her husband, again) in Louisiana.
These states each have a separate jurisdiction and can both prosecute Libby for the
crime of murder. Unfortunately, for Libby she was given wrong advice in prison when
Lisa Winnett !

Double Jeopardy

she was told that she can murder her husband again with out any penalty. I was looking
at the state laws in Washington to see if the Double Jeopardy clause would apply if she
committed both crimes there but even under Washington law she would have most
likely been charged for both crimes because they were separate events.

!
!
!

Lisa Winnett !

Double Jeopardy