Document: 437 U.S. 54 98 S.Ct. 2170 57 L.Ed.2d 43 Thomas SANABRIA, Petitioner,v.UNITED STATES. No. 76-1040. Argued Nov. 8, 1977. Decided June 14, 1978. Syllabus Title 18 U.S.C. § 1955 (1976 ed.) makes it a federal offense for five or more persons to conduct an "illegal gambling business" in violation of the law place where business is located. Petitioner, along with several others, was indicted violating single count charging that defendants' involved numbers betting and on horse races specified Massachusetts statute. The Government's evidence at trial District Court showed defendants had been engaged both betting. At close case defense counsel argued Government failed prove statute because did not prohibit but only After rested, judge granted their motion exclude all then acquit petitioner lack his connection horse-betting business. against remaining went jury, they were convicted. appealed under 3731 from order excluding numbers-betting judgment acquitting petitioner, sought new portion indictment relating Appeals held jurisdiction appeal, taking view that, although 3731, by its terms, authorizes appeal orders "dismissing . as any one counts," word "counts" refers discrete basis imposing criminal liability, since allegations bases liability duplicitously joined count, Court's action constituted "dismissal" "charge" acquittal insufficient charge, therefore authorized charge. court hold Double Jeopardy Clause Fifth Amendment bar retrial, voluntarily terminated proceedings moving, effect, dismiss it. vacated acquittal, remanded Held: 1. A retrial theory barred Clause. Pp. 63-74. (a) erroneously characterized theory. There charged, rder language stricken, amended, entered entire found guilty without specifying so respect liability. 65-68. (b) To extent indictment's description too narrow warrant admission certain evidence, court's ruling erroneous evidentiary ruling, which led however erroneous, bars further prosecution aspect hence appellate review error. 68-69. (c) Even if could be said "dismissed" allegation, would subject second "same offense" he acquitted. Under participation offense, no matter how many state statutes enterprise violated, regard this having charged business, violations may have committed are severable avoid Clause's retrials offense." 69-74. 2. Once defendant has acquitted, "egregiously erroneous" legal rulings leading might be, there exception constitutional rule forbidding successive trials same offense. Fong Foo v. United States, 369 141, 82 671, 7 629. Thus here, while excluded, produced thereby final unreviewable. Lee 432 23, 97 2141, 53 80; Jeffers 137, 2207, 168, distinguished. 75-78. 548 F.2d 1, reversed. Francis J. DiMento, Boston, Mass., petitioner. Frank H. Easterbrook, Washington, D. C., respondent, pro hac vice, special leave Court. Mr. Justice MARSHALL delivered opinion Court.* 1 issue presented whether States midtrial resulting exclusion subsequently acquittal. Resolution depends application somewhat unusual facts case. 2 * Petitioner indicted, ed.), conduct, finance, manage, supervise, direct, own part business." 1955(a). Such defined conducted located operates least 30 days earns $2,000 day. 1955(b)(1).1 single-count here relevant "accepting, recording registering bets wagers parimutual [sic ] number pool result contest skill, speed, endurance beast," "was laws Commonwealth Massachusetts, wit, M.G.L.A. Chapter 271, Section 17."2 3 primarily case, petitioner's counsel, who represented 8 11 defendants, moved clients. Joined other argued, inter alia, statutory section alleged indictment, Mass.Gen.Laws Ann., ch. 17 (West 1970), construed courts, applied "games competition" such races. responded "violation State jurisdictional element [the federal] statute" "not every [defendant] must law." accepted denied motion, stating "a convicted [only] illegal] some way." 4 Petitioner's clarification "the allegation [was] still case." indicated was, state-court authority proposition include also expressed view, however, correct, "we do o[n] numbers." demurred, arguing necessarily follow" acceptance theory.3 Taking lead court, next "to strike limit evidence." denied. 5 announced reversing earlier discovered holding prohibited 17, 271.4 struck betting, apparently believed required failure set forth proper section.5 6 point alone, activities. disagree show involvement operation, repeated argument "jurisdictional" nature state-law violation. rejected contention, established terms you Government] it, 17" "connected I mean operation." concluded: "I don't think you've done it." It acquittal6 embodying later day.7 day reconsider "its striking concerning operation illegal pool" decision granting Sanabria's judgement acquittal."8 Prompted arguments support reconsideration, asked why raised objection citation what prejudice resulted cite section. Counsel "ripened" until, end take judicial notice need allege actual prejudice. motions reconsider, restore acquittal.9 10 jury betting; filed timely "from [the] entering denying Motion Reconsideration." Conceding 9 First Circuit first appeal. Although statute, counts,"10 "count" "interpret[ed] refer imposition liability." (1976). Viewing "discrete bas[es] liability" Id., 4-5, n. 4. concluded "if double jeopardy clause does future charge." F.2d, 5. Consistent above analysis, Since imported "criminal such," attributable "prosecutorial overreaching," permitting after defendant's request mistrial. 7-8, citing Dinitz, 424 600, 96 1075, 47 267 being trial, resolve merits favor. held, based intervening decision,11 Cou t erred "dismissing" Accordingly, "vacated" "remanded government try charges upon numbering activities." 8. We certiorari, 433 907, 2970, 1090 (1977),12 limiting our related issues appealability jeopardy.13 now reverse. II 12 In Wilson, 420 332, 95 1013, 232 (1975), we primary purpose prevent trials, appeals per se. dismissed verdict rendered, simply reinstated successful.14 That will follow forbid limited circumstances constitutionally permissible.15 Appealability turns ordered below violate command "person [shall] offence twice put life limb."16 13 deciding permissible immediately confront fact acquitted indictment. " '[a] [may] reviewed putting defendant] jeopardy, Constitution,' recently described most fundamental history jurisprudence." Martin Linen Supply Co., 430 564, 571, 1349, 1354, 51 642 (1977), quoting Ball, 163 662, 16 1192, 1195, 41 L.Ed. 300 (1896). manifested explicit extension situations "based egregiously foundation." 143, 672, 629 (1962); see Green 355 184, 188, 78 221, 223, 199 (1957). various lacked power direct before rested case.17 Appeals' erred, nevertheless "violated when aside directed petitioners tried again U.S., S.Ct., retried even underlying erroneous. 14 these basic principles. Indeed, concedes unreviewable charge.18 disputed question, 15 contends, accordance reasoning Appeals, responds "dismiss" anything rather count; further, assuming arguendo theory, urges consider correctly effectively actually crime two counts count. difficulty encounters charge counts. Legal consequences ordinarily flow happened, party vantage hindsight. See Central Tablet Mfg. Co. 417 673, 690, 94 2516, 2526, 398 (1974).19 precise manner drawn cannot ignored, important function ensure "in taken similar offence, record [will] sho[w] accuracy plead former conviction." Cochran 157 286, 290, 628, 630, 39 704 (1895), quoted approval Russell 749, 764, 1038, 1047, 240 Hagner 285 427, 431, 52 417, 419, 76 861 (1932).20 With formally persuaded correct characterize While form exalted over substance determining terminating prosecution, Serfass supra, 377, 392-393, 1057 (1975); Jorn, 400 470, 478 7, 91 547, 553, 27 543 (1971); Goldman, 277 229, 236, 48 486, 488, 72 862 (1928), neither appropriate entirely ignore Barber, 219 72, 78, 31 209, 211, 55 99 (1911). Here issued orders, charged. No compare Alberti, 568 617, 621 (CA2 1977), nor amended. liability: "Th unlawfully engaging 18, Code, Sections 2, allowed government's 19 "It hereby ORDERED Sanabria is, discharged go day." 20 itself acquittal." Notice Appeal.21 Similar appears reconsideration originated below. Thus, well seemed agreement made interpretation 21 assume 13, supra. But purposes admissible can regarded "dismissal." find necessary cf. 80 (1977); rather, evidence. extent, believe properly ruling,22 1354; 223; 1195. B 22 acquitted.23 23 Congress, establishes defines offenses. Few, any, limitations imposed legislative define Brown Ohio, 161, 165, 2221, 2225, 187 (1977). once Congress prescription "allowable unit prosecution," Universal C. I. T. Credit Corp., 344 218, 73 227, 260 (1952); Bell 349 81, 75 620, 905 (1955); Braverman 317 49, 63 99, 87 (1942); re Nielsen, 131 176, 93 33 118 (1889), determines scope protection afforded prior conviction Whether particular course involves distinct "offenses" congressional choice.24 24 allowable assimilate se into penal code, acts independent H.R.Rep.No.91-1549, p. (1970). Iannelli 770, 784-790, 1284, 1293-1296, 616 (1975). himself performed act law.25 law.26 And, recognizes, "no violated." Brief 31. 25 undisputed concededly doubt truly 26 'a resolution, not, factual elements charged.' 2146, 1355. proof key "factual charged": with" 59.27 Had participating during time period theory.28 disregarded render horsebetting less "offense" "The fragile guarantee [can avoided] simple expedient dividing series temporal spatial units," 169, 2227, or, today, legislature. id., 169 2227.29 recognizing either theory,30 contends separate proper, another 33. true, share—that 59. This finding stands absolute business.31 28 offense."32 warranting reprosecution following basis" quite unsuccessful i (1942). received consecutive sentences four conspiracy, each alleging conspiracy substantive provision narcotics laws. conceded existed, existed; nonetheless, urged punishments objects. firmly argument: 29 "[T]he determined reference embraces object commit crimes, constitutes punishes. agreements conspiracies envisages than one." 53, 102. apply essence created "business," "agreement."33 offended seeks instead seeking punish him Braverman.34 "If offenses barring prosecutions." 166, 2225. "dismissed," conclude subsequent conducting III 32 question exceptions 15, here. short answer erroneous," 674, be. argues, relying principally 168 waived rights moving objecting trial. "functionally indistinguishable declaration mistrial" request. 31, 2146. mistrial analogy relied manifestly inapposite attached Lee, rendered; indeed, termination acquittal," Here, contrast, proceeded verdict, clearly contemplate 30-31, 2143, contemplated trial—nor have, Where terminates "double principles governing permissibility mistrial," bearing. 34 Nor position. conspiring distribute 846. Eight Members agreed continuing 848 offense," 846 lesser included Prior specifically opposed effort indictments together, ground 144 2210. Reasoning "elect[ed] separately," 152, 2217, and, raising potential problem, 152-154, 2214.35 instant presents different situation. never offenses,36 fortiori argue multo "elect" undergo trials. 35 Finally, agree present hypothetical situation reserved opportunity obtain determination knowingly allows placed defense.' 394, 1065, Solicitor General; 7. "legal defense" charged: 1955. Unlike questions states unconstitutional, violates valid sufficiency defenses" capable resolved instances, favor completely precludes conviction, "legal" reason codefendants. insufficiency establish understood 36 real quarrel Neither permits relief adverse rulings—most motions—that 351-352, 1025-1026; S.Rep.No.91-1296, waives whenever error leads undercut adversary assumption system justice rests, 159-160, 2209 (STEVENS, J., dissenting concurring part), vitiate Amendment. 37 resolution As clear, absolutely circumstances. thus 38 Reversed. 40 STEVENS, concurring. join text opinion, dictum footnote 23. true "that barrier dismissing count," ante, 69 equally f llows—at faithful concept courts conferred Congress—that 42 Criminal Act, district information counts, except shall lie Constitution prohibits prosecution." (Emphasis added.) By plain encompass Putting side indictment" within meaning 576, 1358, concurring), grant unequivocally dismissal "as counts." "subunit[s] "portion[s] "counts," well-known unambiguous term art. 44 amendment 1971, Act [should be] strictly right Carroll 354 399-400, 77 1332, 1335-1336, 1442 (1957)." Will 389 90, 96-97, 88 269, 274, 305. pattern exemplified Linen, abandon approach; reverses direction reads whatever course, indicates intended liberally construed," (1970), expression intent give us license words fact, suggest "one counts" ambiguous; argues given eliminate '[t]echnical distinctions pleadings .' Ante, hollow ring light assertion "[t]he 'in conviction.' 65-66. Furthermore, my judgment, provided liability," fosters eliminates technical encourages exactly sort near sighted parsing discourage. 45 cannot, therefore, reason, reasons stated 46 BLACKMUN, whom REHNQUIST joins, dissenting. odd one, factually procedurally. Because afford little guidance precedent struggle create understanding out confusion lengthening list decisions thought, enunciated late last Term U. (1977)—which deem difficult one—had share distinction 75, "manifestly inapposite." misdescription order, defendant-petitioner's maneuvers should surrender receive drawn. Further, me succeeded read way required. affirm Appeals. WHITE joins Parts I, II-A, opinion. provides part: "Prohibition businesses. "(a) Whoever conducts, finances, manages, supervises, directs, owns fined $20,000 imprisoned years, both. "(b) used section— "(1) 'illegal business' means which— "(i) political subdivision conducted; "(ii) business; "(iii) remains substantially continuous excess thirty gross revenue "(2) 'gambling' includes pool-selling, bookmaking, maintaining slot machines, roulette wheels dice tables, lotteries, policy, bolita games, selling chances therein. "(3) 'State' Columbia, Puerto Rico, territory possession States." full: "From about 1971 thereafter up including November Revere, defendants] unlawfully, knowingly, wilfully accepting, beast, (i) (ii) conducted, financed, managed, supervised, owned (iii) thousand dollars ($2,000) day; 2." When Judge "would follow," responded: "Because Defendants operating law. Now, there's race aspe aspects well, merely satisfied initiation Federal Boyle, 346 Mass. 189 N.E.2d 844 (1963). argue, previously, 3, "other aspects" violated Instead, "similar acts." consistently maintained irrelevant characterization Tr. Oral Arg. 12; grounds infra 67. motions, defect causing correction Fed.Rule Crim.Proc. 11, infra. If restored vacating solely exclus discharged. explained follows: granted, think, probably, Reconsider Acquittal decisions: 332 [332] [95 232]; Jenkins, 358 1006, 250]; Serfass, 377 1055, 265], decided term. All those seem say containing importing reversal require "In [v. (1962)] discharged, draw start Jenkins distinguished Wilson-Jenkins-Serfass group ." Another "suppressing indictment." contend appealable provision. moreover, paragraph authorize occurred verdict. Cf. Morrison, 429 24, 50 531 1089, 1094, cert. denied, 837, 104, 103 Morrison similarly worded harmless Based sufficient "notice activity 1955." petition certiorari time. requirement Rule 22(2) jurisdictional, Schacht 58, 63-65, 90 1555, 1559-1560, supported affidavits, waiver requirement. motion. review, three fourth gave rely Our questions. 271 1970). 358, 250 attached, successful "further devoted going charged." 370, 1013. 29-30, 2145-2146, permitted, e. g., successfully (1896); declared "manifest necessity," Wade Hunter, 336 684, 834, 974 (1949); requests absence prosecutorial overreaching, (1976); functionally equivalent mistrial, occasions observed authorizing appeals, 'intended remove barriers' prosecutions. 568, 1353, 337, 1018, turn issues. 286 556 (CA1 1961). significance directing bring giving instructions 567 5, 573, 1352; Sisson, 399 267, 2117, 2129, 608 allowing illustrated considering "theory multiplicity, 20, forced elect proceed (1952), probably chosen stronger. event, problem arisen. apparent duplicitous. Only alleged, infra, 70-71. normally several, committing alleged. 7(c)(1); Advisory Committee's Notes U.S.C.App., 1413 ed.); 19, warranted specify arguably rendered critical theory." "critical ruling," "dismissal," cases, especially precisely claims ruling. preceding mistake designating always fatal, long specific fairly inferred probing misled prejudiced. Daily Mirror, Inc. New York News, Inc., 533 1976) (per curiam); Jones Nelson, 484 1165 (CA10 1973). "Designation Issue [sic] Appeal," notice, Strike Judgment Acquittal." encompassing excluded. activities law, admissible, absent surprise prejudice, "all [that] 1955(a) ed.). repeatedly Court, proved excluded repeat full argument, ruled 58-59. entered, adhered gone presumably jurors part" 61, One express permit usual organizational subunit appear whole part. hardly meant depend initial prosecutor two, frequently fortuitous interests served 3731. import empty formalism expressly designed "[t]echnical H.R.Conf.Rep.No.91-1768, (1970); accord, note considered reached result. 617 1977). Note, Twice Jeopardy, Yale L.J. 262, 268, 302-310 (1965). analyze so-called evidence" test, determine transaction rise prosecutions, convictions, and/or statutes. See, Gavieres 220 338, 342, 421, 422, 489 (1911); Blockburger 284 299, 180, 306 (1932); Gore 357 386, 1280, 1405 (1958); 166-167 6, Jones, 1387 (CA6 1976), 431 964, 2919, 1059 controlled defining act, distinguishable Ebeling Morgan, 237 625, 710, 59 1151 (1915); Burton 202 344, 688, (1906). Ladner 79 (1955). Hawes, 529 472, (CA5 1976). Numerous cases recognized proscribes degree mere bettor. DiMuro, 540 503, 507-508 733, 749 Leon, 534 667, 676 1976); Brick, 502 219, 225 (CA8 1974); Smaldone, 485 1333, 1351 1973), 416 936, 1934, 1960, 301 (1974); 1019, 1021-1022 (CA7), 414 857, 162, 107 (1973); Ceraso, 467 653, 656 (CA3 1972); Becker, 461 230, 232-233 1972), grounds, 903, 2597, 208 (1974). Similarly, participated (or grossed day), existed met earnings criteria). Graham, 1357, 1359 (CA9 Marrifield, 515 877, 880-881 1975); Schaefer, 510 1307, 1312 (CA8), sub nom. Del Pietro 421 975, 1975, 466 1351; DiMario, 473 1046, 1048 (CA6), 412 2298, 972 (1973). Wright, Practice Procedure 125, 241 (1969). Sabella, 272 206, 211 1959) (Friendly, J.); Hanf 235 715 352 880, 102, 81 (1956). Jackson, 560 112, 121 1977) (Government Clause, "fragment components"). "theories punishment collateral estoppel fact. Ashe Swenson, 397 436, 1189, 469 theoretically prohibiting gambling, specifies six illegally participate i. e., conducting, financing, managing, supervising, directing, owning accept varied, time, reprosecuted acquittals others. businesses proved, convictions proper. American Tobacco 328 781, 787-788, 66 1125, 1128, 1575 (1946) (holding inapplicable alleged). easy ascertain 508-509; Bobo, 477 974, 988 (CA4 difficulties sides existed. Tanner, 471 128, 141 409 949, (1972); Mayes, 512 637, 652 422 1008, 2629, 670 Young, 503 1072, 1075 Cohen, 197 1952). Short 614 1937); Powe 598 1926); Weiss, 293 F. 992 (ND Ill.1923). subjected Justices total 848. They Jeffers, offenses, "never affirmatively difference great 154 2218. voting vacate punishments. highlighted behalf dog [The betting] [must] It's like multiple conspiracy." Record 28-29. shown office Bickford Avenue. 29-30.

Category: 0