Document: 431 U.S. 651 97 S.Ct. 2034 52 L.Ed.2d Donald ABNEY, Larry Starks and Alonzo Robinson, Petitioners,v.UNITED STATES. No. 75-6521. Argued Jan. 17, 1977. Decided June 9, Syllabus Petitioners others were charged in a single-count indictment with conspiracy an attempt to obstruct interstate commerce by means of extortion, violation the Hobbs Act. challenged as duplicitous, contending that its single count improperly both violate The District Court refused dismiss but required prosecution prove all elements offenses indictment, instructed jury effect. returned guilty verdict against each petitioner. Appeals reversed ordered new trial on certain evidentiary grounds, at same time directing Government elect between charges remand. After elected proceed charge, petitioners moved grounds retrial would expose them double jeopardy modified election, failed charge offense. denied motion, immediately appealed. affirmed, did not address Government's argument court had no jurisdiction hear appeal since denial petitioners' motion was "final decision" within meaning 28 U.S.C. § 1291, which grants courts appeals review "all final decisions" district courts, civil criminal. Held: 1. Court's pretrial order denying thus appealable. Pp. 656-662. (a) Although lacking finality traditionally considered indispensable appellate review, such falls "collateral order" exception final-judgment rule announced Cohen v. Beneficial Industrial Loan Corp., 337 541, 69 1221, 93 L.Ed. 1528, it constitutes complete, formal, and, court, rejection accused's claim, very nature is collateral to, separable from, principal issue whether or accused offense charged. 657-660. (b) Moreover, rights conferred Double Jeopardy Clause be significantly undermined if claims postponed until after conviction sentence, only protects individual being subjected punishments also guarantee twice put for 660-662. 2. under 1291 pass merits challenge sufficiency does come exception. That "collateral" any sense term, rather goes heart issues resolved upcoming trial. adversely may reviewed effectively, necessary, corrected when judgment results. 662-663. 3. preclude charge. It cannot assumed disregarded instructions initial could return unless proved beyond reasonable doubt therefore appear acquit while convicting urge possibility view general verdict. 663-665. 3 Cir., 530 F.2d 963, affirmed part, remanded. Ralph David Samuel, Philadelphia, Pa., petitioners. Richard L. Thornburgh, Washington, D.C., respondent. Mr. Chief Justice BURGER delivered opinion Court. 1 We granted certiorari determine decision 1291,1 If decision, we must decide: bars instant prosecution; have consider non-double-jeopardy presented pendent appeals; so, (c) erred refusing alternative asserted 2 (1) In March 1974, United States Eastern Pennsylvania charging petitioners, Abney, Starks, two others, Act, 18 1951.2 case based upon testimony one Ulysses Rice, alleged victim conspiracy. Rice owner operator tavern selling liquor distilled bottled outside State. According engaged pattern extortionate practices him. Initially, activities been thinly veiled pretense solicitations subscriptions Black Muslim newspapers, sales various food items, contributions holiday. Eventually, however, demands larger sums money, including $200 weekly "taxes" accompanied threats, made his place business. These threats led contact Federal Bureau Investigation provided him "marked money" body tape recorder anticipation future When demand made, paid marked currency recorded transaction recorder. arrested despite their bona fide gifts religious causes. recording last later introduced surprisingly, useful refuting this claim innocent purpose. 4 Both prior during, ensuing trial, duplicity offenses, claiming apparently agreed contention, either require prosecutor theories. Rather, establish represented he do, effect: 5 "I point out defendants essential these before defendant found guilty." Tr. 10-60 (emphasis added). 6 petitioner, acquitted indictment. 7 On appeal, Third Circuit convictions ground key admitted into evidence without proper authentication. 515 112 (1975). duplicitous. Id., 115-118. However, admission unauthenticated necessitated event, unnecessary indictment's duplicitous court's harmless. 118. Nonetheless, directed remand avoid similar problems next 118, 125. 8 remand, then arguing: jeopardy; appealed Appeals. 9 Before addressing claims, Appeals' interlocutory asked DiSilvio, 520 247 (1975), overruled; there held constituted such, F.2d, 248 n. 2a. argument. ordering submitted briefs oral argument, explicitly rejected attacks 10 (2) 11 (1, 2) approach threshold appealability question principles mind. First, well settled constitutional right appeal. McKane Durston, 153 684, 14 913, 38 87 (1894). Indeed, century established, existed criminal cases, result, rarely allowed.3 As described period Reetz Michigan, 188 505, 23 390, 47 563 (1903): 12 "(T)rials practice even gravest offences ended except cases where judges present certified law court." 508, S.Ct., 392. 13 presently know purely creature statute; exercise statutory terms applicable statute case, 1291. (3-5) Second, authorized Congress has firm congressional policy "piecemeal" consistently given effect policy. Finality predicate federal jurisdiction. 15 "The principle jurisdiction, derived from common enacted First Congress, requires nisi prius proceedings await termination judgment." DiBella States, 369 121, 124, 82 654, 656, 614 (c7). 16 Accord, Cobbledick 309 323, 324-326, 60 540, 540-541, 84 783 (1940). This currently embodied decisions courts," Adherence particularly stringent prosecutions because "the delays disruptions attendant intermediate appeal," designed avoid, "are especially inimical effective fair administration law." DiBella, supra, 126, 658. Cobbledick, 540-541. 17 obviously "final" terminates court. number Courts bar immediate order. Barket, 181 (CA8 1975), cert. denied, 429 917, 308, 50 282 (1976); Beckerman, 516 905 (CA2 1975); Lansdown, 460 164 (CA4 1972). Contra, Young, 544 415 (CA9 1976); Bailey, 512 833 (CA5 1975). reaching conclusion, those taken position orders fall so-called first 1528 (1949), are shareholder's derivative action rested diverse citizenship parties. Prior arose over state requiring plaintiff shareholder post security costs litigation applied security, corporate sought ruling posted. Thereafter, entertain 19 holding purposes recognized uniformly limit "those judgments terminate action." U.S., 545, 1225; Eisen Carlisle & Jacquelin, 417 156, 171, 94 2140, 2149, 40 732 (1974). Rather Jackson, author Cohen, pointed out: 20 "(I)t reviewable. . While always instances Stack Boyle, 342 1, 12, 72 7, 96 (1951) (separate opinion). 21 held, "practical than technical construction." 546, 1226. giving construction, identified several factors which, view, rendered statute's meaning. fully disposed applicability court; sense, leave matter "open, unfinished inconclusive." Ibid. simply "step toward disposition (which would) merged judgment"; rather, completely cause asserted. Finally, involved important "lost, probably irreparably," judgment; hence, effective, special, limited setting immediate. concluded: 22 "This appears small class finally action, too independent itself consideration deferred whole adjudicated." 1225. (6) true lacks conclude "small cases" placed confines rule.4 can constitute defendant's claim. There further steps maintains barred Fifth Amendment's guarantee. Hence, 's requirement consummated satisfied. 24 impending i. e., arguing Amendment prosecution, makes whatsoever Nor seek suppression plans use obtaining conviction. See supra; Cogen 278 221, 49 73 275 (1929). contesting authority hale face Menna New York, 423 61, 241, 46 195 (1975); Blackledge Perry, 21, 30, 2098, 2103, 628 (1974); Robinson Neil, 409 509, 876, 878, 35 29 (1973). guilt innocence. fact Harris 404 55, 92 183, 30 212 (1971), State Supreme plea former our 1257.5 25 "Since Constitution forbids second separate apart petitioner constitutionally convicted crimes charged, properly invoked 1257." 56, 184. 26 Turner Arkansas, 407 366, 2096, 32 798 (1972); Colombo 405 756, 762 (1972). Thus, matters embraced here truly they will "affect, affected by, case." 27 (7-9) sentence. To sure, crime, aspect vindicated following judgment, suggests. long more punishments. offense.6 " 'The Amendment, declares, nor shall person subject (for offense) life limb." prohibition punished, .' 'twice jeopardy' language relates potential, risk 'same offense' initially tried." Price Georgia, 398 326, 90 1757, 1759, 300 (1970). Jorn, 400 470, 479, 91 547, 554, 543 (1971); Green 355 184, 187-188, 78 223, 199 (1957); Ball, 163 662, 669, 1192, 1194, 41 (1896). Because focus "risk" conviction, assures that, among other things, forced, exceptions, endure personal strain, public embarrassment, expense once interests wholly unrelated propriety subsequent aptly purpose Clause: underlying idea, deeply ingrained least Anglo-American system jurisprudence, resources power should allowed make repeated attempts convict offense, thereby subjecting ordeal compelling live continuing anxiety insecurity, enhancing though Green, 223. 31 Breed Jones, 421 519, 529-530, 95 1779, 1785-1786, 44 346 Serfass 420 377, 387-388, 1055, 1061-1062, 43 265 554. Obviously, aspects guarantee's protections lost forced "run gauntlet" taken; acquitted, or, convicted, ultimately still prohibit.7 Consequently, exposure enjoy full protection Clause, reviewable occurs. hold rejecting jeopardy, us, satisfy jurisdictional prerequisites 1291.8 33 (3) 34 (10) determining we, course, do contained appealable well. (1976). Our conclusion special considerations permeating justify departure normal finality. Quite obviously, extend encompass passing dismiss. if, Cohen's collateral-order rule. Any encourage of, assert, frivolous bring serious, otherwise nonappealable questions attention (11) Here, think clear failure plainly term; Secondly, juncture proceedings. 36 (4) 37 (12) turn retrial, prosecutor's election Clause. Their focuses They maintain impossible basis them. suggest might possibility, conclude, prohibits Whatever another setting, find factual here.9 noted description prosecutor, electing charges, offenses. word established petitioners.10 emphasized retired. Supra, 654. assume unambiguous finding doubt. E. g., Shotwell Mfg. Co. 371 341, 367, 83 448, 463, 357 (1963). satisfied charge; consequently, crime. North Carolina Pearce, 395 711, 719-720, 89 2072, 2077-2078, 656 (1969); Tateo, 377 1587, 448 (1964). 39 Accordingly, so ordered. WHITE concurs judgment. Section provides follows: Canal Zone, Guam, Virgin Islands, direct Court." 1951 pertinent part: "Whoever obstructs, delays, affects robbery extortion conspires commits threatens physical violence property furtherance plan anything section fined $10,000 imprisoned twenty years, both." permitted 1889 allowing "in crime punishment death." Act Feb. 6, 1889, Stat. 656. A created 1911. Mar. 3, 1911, 1133. Of equally construction previously noted, provision gives cases. (1951). 1257 "Final decrees highest had, ." Ex parte Lange, Wall. 163, 169, 872 (1874): prohibited offence, went (forbade ) suffered not, convicted." (Emphasis added.) cogent analogy drawn decision. There, claimed statute, applicable, dissatisfied posted litigation. By permitting circumstances, sure benefits "canceled out." Admittedly, some engage dilatory Solicitor General fears. believe delay obviated rules policies expedited treatment. supervisory powers summary procedures calendars weed jeopardy. determination exists ambiguous original reach whether, assuming ambiguity, nonetheless permissible. addition portion set gave jury: "(T)he substantive obstruct, affect extortion. extort money natural probable consequences attempt, successfully carried out, way degree, members attempt." 10-25. becomes necessary me define 'conspiracy' 'attempt,' obstructing, delaying affecting do. "Therefore, I you requisites 10-25 10-26. "In integral parts charge." 10-35. "(T)his harmfully proof successful, unlawful objectives obtained. 10-39.

Category: 0