TexasCHLforum.com

That's why I'm asking. Because if they REALLY overturned it, I thought there can't be another trial because of double jeopardy. There would be no charges for the local prosecutor to drop.

IANAL

tacticool wrote:That's why I'm asking. Because if they REALLY overturned it, I thought there can't be another trial because of double jeopardy. There would be no charges for the local prosecutor to drop.

That's not true. It just makes the original trial invalid. The Federal court does not determine the defendant's guilt, only whether or not his trial was fair.

If this were the case the courts and prosecutors would be more careful about following the rules.

IANAL either, but I am sure that one will correct me if I am wrong.

Appeals courts almost never say that a person is innocent or not guilty. They nearly always send the case back for retrial or some other consideration in the original jurisdiction.

About the only time they really declare a conviction to be null and void is when they find a constitutional reason.

Also note that in many cases where evidence is thrown out for lack of probable cause for a search or arrest, the defendant actually is as guilty as homemade sin.

- Jim

seamusTX wrote:Also note that in many cases where evidence is thrown out for lack of probable cause for a search or arrest, the defendant actually is as guilty as homemade sin.

In those cases, I'm in favor of Texas not paying them $80k/yr for their time behind bars.

That probably is why the law is written the way it is.

Sometimes prosecutors can't prove beyond a reasonable doubt that a defendant did what pretty much everyone knows the defendant did, but they can nail the defendant for some other technical violation such as lying to investigators.

- Jim