• theUwUhugger@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    16
    arrow-down
    4
    ·
    edit-2
    3 hours ago

    I am going to cross fingers for it, but wouldn’t the state just resue in a higher court?

    I really don’t think that even a dem controlled supreme court would allow it, but a republican one? We will be lucky if Luigi isn’t yahoo-ed

    • Steve@communick.news
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      38
      ·
      3 hours ago

      It’s not a law suit. It’s a criminal trial. The principal of double jeopardy says that an acquittal by a jury is final. The defendant can’t be charged over the same crime again. They go free and clear.

      • Snot Flickerman@lemmy.blahaj.zone
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        2 hours ago

        Which is why it’s a little crazy that they’re hitting him with both 1st degree murder and 2nd degree murder in one go. If he goes free, wouldn’t this mean they couldn’t try charging him under 1st or 2nd?

        • Z3k3@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          4
          ·
          2 hours ago

          Ok this one needs explaining to me as a non American isn’t there different criteria for 1st and second degree?

          • ImplyingImplications@lemmy.ca
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            6
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            1 hour ago

            The charges for murder vary by State. Here’s a New York lawyer explaining Murder 1 vs Murder 2 as it relates to New York State law. Murder 2 is regular premeditated murder. Murder 1 is murder with the intent of influencing or intimidating government ie. Terrorism. The lawyer in this interview suggests the Terrorism charge is, ironically, politically motivated, but it will be difficult to actually prove beyond a doubt that Luigi’s intentions were to change government policies and not just get even with someone he disliked.

            In most places murder 1 is premeditated murder and murder 2 is manslaughter. Murder 1 in New York is different.

          • Steve@communick.news
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            5
            ·
            2 hours ago

            The jury makes a decision on both separately.
            Charging with both gives the jury 2 options. If they don’t think it was premeditated and planned enough to convict on 1st degree, they can choose to convict on 2nd degree instead.

            If the prosecution only charged him with 1st degree, the jury wouldn’t have any other option. And if acquitted on 1st, he couldn’t be tried again under 2nd degree.

            • Z3k3@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              1 hour ago

              So time/money saving excersize? Don’t get 1st saves doing the whole circus again for 2nd

              Thanks

    • FlowVoid@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      22
      ·
      3 hours ago

      wouldn’t the state just resue in a higher court?

      No, because the constitution prohibits double jeopardy.

      • theUwUhugger@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        8
        arrow-down
        3
        ·
        3 hours ago

        Pls correct me, but you can challenge a ruling for mistrials, can’t you?

        And the higher court decides the legitimacy of the prev ruling, right?

        • kn33@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          1 hour ago

          Mistrials and appeals only work for a guilty verdict. They aren’t an option for a not guilty verdict.

        • FlowVoid@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          19
          ·
          edit-2
          3 hours ago

          Jury nullification means acquittal, and you cannot retry someone after acquittal.

          Also prosecutors generally cannot appeal an acquittal.

        • Monkey With A Shell@lemmy.socdojo.com
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          14
          ·
          edit-2
          3 hours ago

          Non-lawyer but…

          If a jury comes to a conclusion then the defendant is not guilty then it’s game over. A mistrial had to be called before deliberation happen, and that would have to have some material misconduct during the trial, not just ‘I think we gonna lose’. A guilty verdict could be appealed but that appeal is only to decide if the case was conducted fairly (for a retrial request) or to assess the validity of a sentence.

          Basing it off some time I did a lot of legal/court adjacent work for a few years, but I’m pretty sure that’s right.

        • xmunk@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          5
          ·
          edit-2
          3 hours ago

          Assuming the trial results in a hung jury the state can refile the case over and over again - but if the outcome isn’t viewed as a fluke then it’s just a huge waste of money.

          To clarify a hung jury and jury nullification are different things. The most likely outcome is probably a hung jury and I’d rate a non-guilty declaration as more likely than a guilty declaration.