Document: 403 U.S. 384 91 S.Ct. 1801 29 L.Ed.2d 549 Macio Bernard SIMPSONv.State of FLORIDA. No. 1267. June 14, 1971. PER CURIAM. 1 On November 9, 1966, two armed men entered a store in Jacksonville, Florida, and robbed the manager customer. During 1967 petitioner was tried convicted state courts, after jury trial, robbery manager, but conviction reversed on appeal because trial judge neglected to instruct lesser-included offense larceny. Griffin v. State, 202 So.2d 602 (Fla.Dist.Ct.App.1967). In 1968 retried same charge acquitted. Subsequently, he charged with robbing His motion quash information double jeopardy grounds overruled found guilty robbery. Each three verdicts here involved general one. The court imposed 30-year sentence appealed District Court Appeal. 2 Prior adjudication petitioner's apppeal, this rendered its decision Ashe Swenson, 397 436, 90 1189, 25 469. We there held that principle collateral estoppel, which 'bars relitigation between parties issues actually determined at previous trial,' id., 442, 1193, is 'embodied Fifth Amendment guarantee against jeopardy,' 445, S.Ct., 1195, fully applicable States, by force Fourteenth Amendment, light Benton Maryland, 395 784, 89 2056, 23 707. 3 factual situation presented remarkably parallels instant case. There or four had interrupted poker game all six participants. Petitioner been acquitted verdict one players, later second. He contended prohibition operated as bar second prosecution only issue each identity robbers. that: 4 'Where judgment acquittal based upon * (the rule estoppel) requires 'examine record prior proceeding, taking into account pleadings, evidence, charge, other relevant matter, conclude whether rational could have grounded an than defendant seeks foreclose from consideration." Ashe, supra, 444, 1194. 5 Here, contends his robbers sole disputed trials. Appeal, however, declined examine simply instead, matter law, while entitled him invoke first (where sufficiency evidence not appeal) gave rise 'double estoppel application doctrine, appellant estopped contending without further proof State failed prove inasmuch above beyond reasonable doubt participant robbery.' Simpson 237 341, 342 (Fla.App.1970). 6 Supreme divided vote, review, 240 645, filed timely petition for writ certiorari Court. grant we vacate judgment. 7 ground resolved contention plainly tenable. Indeed, itself, specifically noted 'mutuality' ingredient Amendments States. 443, It clear Florida third time it previously secured well acquittal. And, never occurred, prosecutor not, trying case under laid before demanded instruction that, night. must, therefore, be equally unless 'could (been) consideration' constitutional being twice put vitiates conviction. 8 Appeal vacated remanded proceedings inconsistent opinion. 9 so ordered. 10 Vacated remanded. 11 Mr. Justice BRENNAN, whom DOUGLAS joins. 12 customer grew out criminal episode. I agree Court's disposition but, reasons stated my concurring opinion 448, 1196, (1970), would also hold facts Double Jeopardy Clause prohibited prosecuting 13 THE CHIEF JUSTICE BLACKMUN dissent given dissenting Chief 460, 1202. 14 MARSHALL took no part

Category: 0