New York Attorney General: Let's Prosecute People Twice For The Same Crime

[rangerrebew]

New York Attorney General: Let's Prosecute People Twice For The Same Crime

ByBen Shapiro

June 1, 2018


On Thursday, after news broke that President Trump had pardoned Dinesh D’Souza for his campaign finance violations, the New York Attorney General’s office immediately tweeted out that they’d like to pass a state law to unjustifiably jail those who had been pardoned for federal crimes. In fact, they’d like to violate the constitutional prohibition on double jeopardy.

Yes, really.

Here’s their statement and tweet:

https://www.dailywire.com/news/31335/new-york-attorney-general-lets-prosecute-people-ben-shapiro

[Oceander]

There is no violation of the constitutional prohibition on double jeopardy if the federal government and a state government each try the same person for the same set of facts because they are separate sovereigns. 

What this little maggot wants to do is get rid of the NY state law provision that prohibits a NY state prosecution if the person has already been subjected to jeopardy for the same set of facts by another sovereign (ie, the feds or another state).  This provision isn’t mandated under the US or NY constitutions, but it’s a good policy nonetheless.

[rangerrebew]

It would seem New York has decided to battle Mejifornia for the weirdest, most whacked out state.

[Frank Cannon]

Don't worry. This is an elected official in NY state. This dumb bitch will be in jail soon for corruption or pedophilia shortly. It's what they do up there.

[Oceander]

It would seem New York has decided to battle Mejifornia for the weirdest, most whacked out state.

How so?  At least on this particular issue?

[Frank Cannon]

How so?  At least on this particular issue?

How about wanting to adjust their laws strictly because of Trump Derangement Syndrome.

[endicom]

There is no violation of the constitutional prohibition on double jeopardy if the federal government and a state government each try the same person for the same set of facts because they are separate sovereigns. 

What this little maggot wants to do is get rid of the NY state law provision that prohibits a NY state prosecution if the person has already been subjected to jeopardy for the same set of facts by another sovereign (ie, the feds or another state).  This provision isn’t mandated under the US or NY constitutions, but it’s a good policy nonetheless.

I had a problem with this conviction despite his being guilty: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lemrick_Nelson

Acquitted in NYS of a murder charge to be twice tried and found guilty in federal courts with the charge being changed to violation of civil rights.

My problem was that this amounted to double jeopardy.

 

[Hoodat]

How about wanting to adjust their laws strictly because of Trump Derangement Syndrome.

Sounds like a bill of attainder to me.  Also unconstitutional.

[Oceander]

Sounds like a bill of attainder to me.  Also unconstitutional.

It wouldn’t be a bill of attainder if it simply removed the current NY statutory provisions regarding follow-on prosecutions, even if it was motivated by a desire to prosecute a particular individual. 

[Oceander]

I had a problem with this conviction despite his being guilty: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lemrick_Nelson

Acquitted in NYS of a murder charge to be twice tried and found guilty in federal courts with the charge being changed to violation of civil rights.

My problem was that this amounted to double jeopardy.

 

How is that double jeopardy?

[endicom]

How is that double jeopardy?

The same charge under a different name.

[Oceander]

The same charge under a different name.

Between NY and the feds?  No double jeopardy. 

[Cyber Liberty]

I thought it was already proven the Feds can prosecute a crime for the same circumstances a defendant was found Not Guilty of in state courts?  I'm thinking specifically of the Police who beat Rodney King.  Their acquittals in state court caused riots in LA, Bush the Elder tried them in Federal court to quell the mobs, and it was upheld.

If the Feds can do it to the states, then the states can do it to the Feds.

[Cyber Liberty]

Between NY and the feds?  No double jeopardy.

I don't think so either.

[Oceander]

I thought it was already proven the Feds can prosecute a crime for the same circumstances a defendant was found Not Guilty of in state courts?  I'm thinking specifically of the Police who beat Rodney King.  Their acquittals in state court caused riots in LA, Bush the Elder tried them in Federal court to quell the mobs, and it was upheld.

If the Feds can do it to the states, then the states can do it to the Feds.

Exactly.  The only difference here is that NY, by statute, includes as double jeopardy any prior prosecution, whether by NY itself or by another sovereign (like the federal government), so that a prior federal prosecution will bar a subsequent NY prosecution for the same crime.  It’s this statute the AG wants to get rid of. 

[Cyber Liberty]

Exactly.  The only difference here is that NY, by statute, includes as double jeopardy any prior prosecution, whether by NY itself or by another sovereign (like the federal government), so that a prior federal prosecution will bar a subsequent NY prosecution for the same crime.  It’s this statute the AG wants to get rid of.

So it would require an act of the State Legislature?  Is this likely to happen?  (Serious question, you know the lay of that land far better than I.)  And, can they make it retroactive to include D'Souza?

[Oceander]

So it would require an act of the State Legislature?  Is this likely to happen?  (Serious question, you know the lay of that land far better than I.)  And, can they make it retroactive to include D'Souza?

It probably won’t happen, but I wouldn’t put anything past Albany. 

And as long as the statute of limitations is open for him, it wouldn’t have to be retroactive. 

[Cyber Liberty]

It probably won’t happen, but I wouldn’t put anything past Albany. 

And as long as the statute of limitations is open for him, it wouldn’t have to be retroactive.

ty