Opinion ID: 1403275
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 6

Heading: Two Vital Interests of Double Jeopardy

Text: In addressing Yeager 's arguments, the Court reaffirmed its precedent that the constitutional prohibition against double jeopardy embodies two vitally important interests. Yeager, 129 S.Ct. at 2365. The first interest is that the traditional principles of double jeopardy stand for the `deeply ingrained' principle that `the State with all its resources and power should not be allowed to make repeated attempts to convict an individual for an alleged offense.' Id. The second interest is in preserving the finality of the jury's judgment. 129 S.Ct. at 2366. The finality of judgments is preserved through the doctrine of collateral estoppel, which the Yeager Court noted is often more descriptively referred to as issue preclusion. 129 S.Ct. at 2367 n. 4.