Document: 449 U.S. 117 101 S.Ct. 426 66 L.Ed.2d 328 UNITED STATES, Petitioner,v.Eugene DiFRANCESCO. No. 79-567. Argued Oct. 6, 1980. Decided Dec. 9, Syllabus The Organized Crime Control Act of 1970, 18 U.S.C. § 3576, grants the United States right, under specified conditions, to appeal sentence imposed upon a "dangerous special offender." Respondent was convicted federal racketeering offenses at trial in Federal District Court. He sentenced as dangerous offender 3575 two 10-year prison terms, be served concurrently with each other and 9-year previously on convictions an unrelated trial. sought review sentences claiming that Court abused its discretion imposing amounted additional imprisonment respondent for only one year, face findings court made after hearing. Appeals dismissed double jeopardy grounds. Held : Section 3576 does not violate Double Jeopardy Clause Fifth Amendment. Pp. 126-143. (a) Clause's guarantee against multiple trials. "[W]here Government presents no threat successive prosecutions, is offended." v. Martin Linen Supply Co., 430 564, 569-570, 97 1349, 1353-54, 51 642. Accordingly, Government's taking respondent's itself offend principles just because success might deprive benefit more lenient sentence. Neither history sentencing practices, nor pertinent rulings this Court, even considerations policy support proposition criminal sentence, once pronounced, accorded constitutional finality similar which attaches jury's verdict acquittal. provide defendant right know any specific moment time what exact limit his punishment will turn out be. 132-138. (b) increase constitute violation Clause. argument perceives length finally determined when he begins serve it, judge should prohibited from thereafter increasing has force where, statute, Congress specifically provided subject appeal. Under such circumstances, there can expectation original 138-139. (c) conclusion violates neither trials consistent those opinions upheld constitutionality two-stage proceedings. Cf. Swisher Brady, 438 204, 98 2699, 57 705. 139-141. 2 Cir., 604 F.2d 769, reversed remanded. Andrew L. Frey, Washington, D. C., petitioner. Edgar C. NeMoyer, Buffalo, N. Y., respondent. Justice BLACKMUN delivered opinion 1 Pub.L. 91-452, 84 Stat. 922, contains, among things, definition offender," §§ 3575(e) (f);1 authorizes imposition increased offender, 3575(b); take review, 3576.2 issue presented by case whether authorizing so appeal, Clause3 Amendment Constitution.4 * At 1977 jury Western New York, Eugene DiFrancesco conducting affairs enterprise through pattern activity, conspiring commit offense, 1962(c) (d).5 another 1978—before different same District—based indictment returned prior indictment, damaging property, 1361, unlawfully storing explosive materials, 842(j), offenses, 371.6 3 first sentenced, March 1978, later received eight years charge property five conspiracy charge, these concurrently, year unlawful storage consecutively sentences. This total nine years' imprisonment. In April, terms counts earlier trial; were March. thus resulted about year. 4 appealed respective judgments conviction Second Circuit, offender. unanimously affirmed conviction. By divided vote, however, 769 (1979). judges majority did address merits issue. third judge, while agreeing dismissed, based grounds, majority, but grounds inapplicable facts case. F.2d, 787.7 Because importance question, we granted petition certiorari, confined single 444 1070, 100 1010, 62 751 (1980). filed cross-petition. II 5 trial, evidence showed involved arson-for-hire scheme Rochester, area responsible least fires between 1970 1973; ring collaborated owners set fire buildings return shares insurance proceeds; insurers defrauded approximately $480,000 result fires. second participated "Columbus Day bombings," including bombing building Rochester. 6 Prior Government, accordance 3575(a), notice alleging recited intention seek enhanced event After found guilty, hearing, pursuant 3575(b), held. relied testimony adduced public documents attested Columbus bombings, loansharking, murder. App. 27-28, 30. defense offered evidence. It conceded validity records, id., 31-32, objected consideration murder offense had been vacated Id., 28-29. 7 fact ruled within meaning statute. forth record stated revealed "virtually continuous conduct over past years, interrupted relatively brief periods 1975, 1976 1977." 41. found, addition, "criminal history, proven facts, reveals habitual knowing most violent nature lives citizens community. further shows defendant's complete utter disregard safety. defendant, virtue own record, shown himself hardened whom must protected long period possible. Only way defendant." 43.8 thereupon 3575(b) concurrent hereinabove described. 45-46. 8 then took hearing.9 dismissal rested conclusion, it described "inescapable," "to risk substitution greater government place him 'in life or limb.' " 783. III 9 While far are able ascertain, never invalidated frequent occasion recently consider pass claims raised various contexts. See Jorn, 400 470, 91 547, 27 543 (1971); Colten Kentucky, 407 104, 92 1953, 32 584 (1972); Illinois Somerville, 410 458, 93 1066, 35 425 (1973); Chaffin Stynchcombe, 412 17, 1977, 36 714 Wilson, 420 332, 95 1013, 43 232 (1975); Jenkins, 358, 1006, 250 Serfass States, 377, 1055, 265 Breed Jones, 421 519, 1779, 44 346 Dinitz, 424 600, 96 1075, 47 267 (1976); Ludwig Massachusetts, 427 618, 2781, 49 732 642 (1977); Lee 432 23, 2141, 53 80 Arizona 434 497, 824, 54 717 (1978); Burks 437 1, Greene Massey, 19, 2151, 15 Crist Bretz, 28, 2156, 24 Sanabria 54, 2170, Scott, 82, 2187, 65 705 Whalen 445 684, 1432, 63 715 (1980); Vitale, 447 410, 2260, 228 10 These cited cases additions decade less numerous list well-known decisions years. Among Perez, Wheat. 579, L.Ed. 165 (1824); Ex parte Lange, Wall. 163, 21 872 (1874); Ball, 163 662, 16 1192, 41 300 (1896); Kepner 195 100, 797, 114 (1904); Green 355 184, 78 221, 199 (1957); Fong Foo 369 141, 82 671, 629 (1962); Downum 372 734, 83 1033, (1963); Tateo, 377 463, 1587, 12 448 (1964). 11 That important vital day demonstrated host recent cases. application proved facile routine acknowledged changes direction emphasis. See, e. g., supra, overruling supra; U.S., 18, S.Ct., 2150, part, certain area. also Note, Minn.L.Rev. 522 (1940); Westen & Drubel, Toward General Theory Jeopardy, 1978 S.Ct.Rev. 81, 82. Nonetheless, following general emerge Court's may regarded essentially settled: -The design States: 13 "The prohibition 'double jeopardy' designed protect individual being subjected hazards possible than alleged offense. . underlying idea, deeply ingrained Anglo-American system jurisprudence, State all resources power allowed make repeated attempts convict thereby subjecting embarrassment, expense ordeal compelling live continuing state anxiety insecurity, well enhancing possibility though innocent guilty." 187-188, 223. 14 387-388, 1061-62; 35, 2160. concept ancient roots centering common-law pleas autre fois acquit, convict, pardon, W. Blackstone, Commentaries 329-330 (1st ed. 1769), expression legal tradition colonial America. 187, 223; 200, 230 (dissenting opinion); 339-342, 1019-1021; 87, 2191. design, purpose, expressed ways. said "a" "the" "primary purpose" preserve judgments," 33, 2159, "integrity" judgments, 92, 2194. But "central objective trials" barrier "affording prosecution opportunity supply failed muster proceeding." 11, 2147; 215-216, 2706. Implicit thought if reprosecute, gains advantage learns strengths weaknesses own. 105, n.4, 2201, n.4 352, 1026. Still noted: 17 "Because before judgment becomes final, protection embraces 'valued have completed particular tribunal.' 503 [98 829], quoting Wade Hunter, 336 689 [69 834, 974] (1949). 214-215, 2706; 36, 2161. 19 On occasion, stress placed punishment: 20 "It would legally follow real danger guarded Constitution." Wall., 173. summarized: 22 "That [against jeopardy] consist three separate protections. protects And punishments offense." (Footnotes omitted.) North Carolina Pearce, 395 711, 717, 89 2072, 2076, 23 656 (1969).10 415, 2264. -An acquittal weight. unequivocally prohibits acquittal," "public interest strong acquitted retried 'the egregiously erroneous foundation.' 143, 672, 629. If innocence accused confirmed final judgment, Constitution conclusively presumes unfair." 503, 829. law "attaches significance acquittal." 91, 2193. 25 justified ground that, however mistaken been, unacceptably high superior resources, wear down "enhancing 188, 571, 573, n.12, 1354, 1355, n.12. "[W]e necessarily afford absolute acquittal-no matter how decision" (emphasis original). 16, 2149.11 26 definitely otherwise where ended recognized bring mistrial occasioned "manifest necessity." Wheat., 580. 514-516, 834-835; (1973). Furthermore, reprosecution who successfully moved barred, deliberately provoke request. 606-611, 1078-1079. Similarly, terminated request guilt innocence, appellate decision necessitated reversal. 98-99, 2197-98. A fortiori, bar ruling favor guilty entered trier fact. Rojas, 554 938, 941 (CA9 1977); De Garces, 518 1156, 1159 (CA2 1975). 28 Finally, conviction, "imposes limitations whatever retry succeeded getting aside" 720, 2078. price indeed society pay every immunity defect sufficient reversible error proceedings leading conviction." 466, 1589. "[T]o require stand again invoked statutory upset act governmental oppression sort intended protect." There is, exception rule: retrial insufficiency 24, 2154. 29 -Where apply, "its sweep absolute." n.6, 2147, n.6. 30 "has case, absent explicit authority." 84-85, 2190. enactment paragraph now 3731 91-644 1971, 1890, permitting except "where clause prosecution," concluded "Congress remove barriers appeals allow whenever permit." 337, 1018. 85, 2190.12 IV 31 From principles, propositions present controversy emerge: A. 1353-1354. 342, ,S.Ct., 1021; supra. follows Indeed, Wilson Scott won victory court, tribunal manner go free. nevertheless, challenge, 33 B. focus, thus, relief requested, our task determine conclusiveness We conclude equation. 34 As noted above, "controlling principle." 346, 1023; 569, 1353. But, course, show absolute. prevents committed (1896). why "law Appeal therefore, seem treated treated, retrial. Put way, purposes, "implied acquittal" Van Alstyne, Gideon's Wake: Harsher Penalties "Successful" Criminal Appellant, 74 Yale L.J. 606, 634-635 (1965). agree approach withstand analysis. Any reliance (1904),13 misplaced, focus undesirability are, furthermore, fundamental distinctions acquittal, fail recognize them ignore Historically, pronouncement carried writs acquit protections 340, 1020. Although distinction great early English common nearly felonies, originally limited, punishable critical death deportation, see Comment, Statutory Implementation Clauses: Life Moribund Constitutional Guarantee, 339, 342-343 (1956), gained became common. court's during term permitted. practice principle. 167; 192-194 E. Coke, Institutes (13th 1789). Commonwealth Weymouth, Allen (84 Mass.) 144 (1861). context, drafted mind. 340-342, 1020-1021; 200-201, 230-231 opinion). accounts established courts recall (and venture comment limitation) yet begun DiLorenzo, 429 216, 221 1970), cert. denied, 402 950, 1609, 120 Vincent 337 891, 894 (CA8 1964), 380 988, 85 1363, 281 Thus certainty demonstrates ascribed prevent legislative body prosecution. countries trace their systems permit appeals. Can.Rev.Stat. 605(1)(b) 748(b)(ii) (1970), Martin's Annual Code 523, 636 Greenspan 1979); Zealand Crimes 1961, amended 1966, Repr.Stat.N.Z. 383(2) M. Friedland, 290 (1969). 37 clearly establish qualities attend Bozza 330 160, 67 645, 818 (1947), crime carrying mandatory minimum fine Later day, recalled both held jeopardy. game wrong move means prisoner." 166-167, 648-649. What done "did twice put petitioner 167, 649. (1969), severe reconviction successful rule retrial, "well part jurisprudence." at, 1981. Stroud 251 15, 40 50, 64 103 (1919). applied Pearce ceiling retrial.14 dealt new rather than, here, difference "conceptual nicety." 722, 2079. 38 do prohibit above basic provision, consequent subjection expense, anxiety, innocent. considerations, significant prosecution's statutorily limited involve approximate innocence. taken promptly court. charged knowledge statute provisions, until expired. To sure, prolong exist, finite information. primary concern obviously relate determination guilt, already behind him. harassed convicted, although characteristically large basis information, presentence report, developed outside courtroom. purely judicial determination, much goes into inquiry nonadversary nature. 39 many types sanctions unaware precise extent time, life, considered violative Thus, revocation probation Thomas 327 795 (CA10), 1000, 1936, 1051 situations parole revoked imposed. Kuck, 573 (CA10 1978); Walden, 578 966, 972 (CA3 1978), 849, 99, (1979); 540 465 1976), 1101, 1125, 551 Dunn 182 U.S.App.D.C. 261, 561 259 (1977). aware imposed, situation us respect. similarly His legitimate expectations defeated revoked. All highlights acquittals demonstrate given degree increase. cases, asKepner (1904), andFong (1962), contrary result. V question constitutes did. 784-787. appears attributable primarily extending dictum Benz, 282 304, 307, 113, 114, 75 354 (1931), effect barring service constitutionally based.15 reduce begun. power. went say gratuitously, 307-308, quotations textbook 173, effectuated session, dictum's source, states Lange erroneously fine, authorized impose punishments. paid days prison. resentenced year's having suffered alternative punishments, "the punish gone." 176. observed (the maximum) 175. holding susceptible application. confine Benz Lange's context. argued circumstances S.Rep.No.91-617, p. (1969); Dunsky, Constitutionality Increasing Sentences Appellate Review, 69 J.Crim.L. Criminology (1978). 42 evolved holdings plainly demonstrates, receive legislature authorized. No problem imprisonment, punishment. 688-689, 1436-1437; 697-698, 1440-1441 (concurring clear and, accordingly, expounded Lange. VI 630-632, 2788. 118-120, 1961-1962.16 (1978), affords indeed, precedent reach. concerned Maryland use master Juvenile proceeding. master, receiving evidence, beyond reasonable doubt minor assault robbery. master's recommendation conclusion. exceptions, procedural rule, responded motion dismiss exceptions provision de novo violated denied relief. habeas, Important "second crack." closed "and consent minor." Ibid. nothing procedure "unfairly subjects ." "burdens akin resulting judge's permissible posttrial briefing bench 'expense' full-blown 217, 2707. "[t]o makes supplemental .-either sua sponte, response State's juvenile's either supplemented parties raise objection-he without violating constraints Clause." 219, 2708. 45 characterized process distinguished (1975), juvenile when, adjudicatory finding transferred adult tried conduct. 46 Like Swisher, system, concerns whereas difference, consequence, scope Swisher. specifies employed procedures findings. empowered correct error. need find master; free relating jeopardy, was, constitutional. exaltation form substance avoided. context action controlling, label action. 1354; 336, could achieved purpose slightly whose unquestionable. term, recommend lesser appeals, accept reject it. offer conceivable base objection. Yet impact exactly as, possibly worse written. advanced approving declaring unconstitutional. 48 perhaps worth noting passing represents attempt attack justice tendency some mete light involving organized management personnel." Challenge Free Society, Report President's Commission Law Enforcement Administration 203 (1967). Congress' plea. pp. 85-87 narrowly focused identified. example "Government oppression" stands guard. 2198. elsewhere areas reform. Frankel, Sentences: Without Order P. O'Donnell, Churgin Curtis, Just Effective Sentencing System Judge Frankel "basic problem" unbridled sentencers arbitrary discriminatory." 49. creates check unlimited power, lead consistency sentencing. withstands challenge us. reversed, remanded opinion. 50 ordered. BRENNAN, WHITE, MARSHALL, STEVENS join, dissenting. 52 Title 35761 appeal2 district too permits severity initial holds embodied Amendment.3 fundamentally misperceives appropriate reaches enhancement unconstitutional I respectfully dissent. acknowledges, must, principal purposes: "protect offense," 223, (1957), An overriding function punishments: (1874). derive exclusively prosecution, stem supra re Bradley, 318 87 608 (1943), examples flowing trial-imprisonment fine-but purports exhaust reach consistently assumed subsequent imposition-the case-also Clause.4 For example, "[t]he amend mitigate punishment, [is based] penalty ."5 Reid Covert, 37-38, n.68, 77 1222, 1241, 1148 stated: "In Swain 553, 448, 823, President commanding officer court-martial provisions applicable unconstitutional." statements dicta, correctly "[a]lthough dicta binding, number authority sources impressive strength prevalence view bars court." 785 1979). My Brother REHNQUIST interpreted limits legislature." 703, 1444, (1980) 55 Not repeatedly analytic similarity requires factfinder's warrant guilty. 572, second-degree permitted first-degree implicit impermissible. ; Price Georgia, 398 323, 90 1757, (1970). sufficiently analogous preclude very proceeding involves examination evaluation entail 25-year justify higher unwarranted. sentences, factual adjudication removes burden charges potential receive. Unless according finality6 acquittals, implicit, untenable.7 56 proffers several reasons differently. None persuasive. First, suggests historical supports verdicts Ante, 133-134. observation "common-law retrial," ante, 133, true, dispose 3576. Moreover, "so court," 133-134, [the defendant] sentence," 134, sanctioned Second, posits "is respect," 137, revocation, extraordinary statement overlooks obvious differences knows maximum serve, shortened probation. hand, since conditional, outset breach conditions beneficial treatment. worst point view, reinstated. results change circumstance grant Here predicated activity unlikely activity. 58 Third, argues offenders reduced 142. concludes striking elevate "form substance" obtained "by unquestionable." strange statutes they written, event, hypothetical legislation "slightly different," substantially 3576: create wholly unprecedented relationship courts. retains structure "form" "substance" militate situation. 59 Fourth, apparently central refusal accord faulty characterization phase acknowledges directed protecting undue 222,8 startling "[t]his appeal," 136, exposes minimal incremental embarrassment him." believe misunderstands import 60 suggest defendants spend important. predicate clearly, breathe sigh overwhelming willing enter plea bargains order keep possible.9 Surely, cannot merely incidental suffer acute anxiety. certainly guilt-innocence phase. pretend reason valid reality. 61 rests circular notion [Government] [pursuant 3576] expired." 136. increases prolongs alleviates conditioning expectations. Logically extended, reasoning acquittal.10 insulating part,11 oppression, objection "charge" "with knowledge" eradicate differentiate longer reversal Our "ultimately premise has, behest, nullified slate wiped clean." 721, followed appeal.12 gives up maximum. observed, "increases existing sentences" trials." Since argue entitled provides misplaced. There, allowing aside proposed recommendations masters hold ultimately harsher juveniles. critically adjudicate transmit investigation latter's review.13 Here, contrast, full convicted. Merely rights convert mere recommendation. differentiating submit punishment.14 otherwise, does, which, logical conclusion,15 Congress, Such impermissible I, STEVENS, join BRENNAN's dissent, note today adequately Harlan's powerful analysis 744-751, 2085-2088 dissenting part). Its purported Pearce-that rationale variously verbalized, nullified," 720-721, 2078-clearly prosecutor's behest nullified. 68 straightforward Harlan worthy emphasis: "Every enunciated [v. 184 [78 199] (1957)] applies equal bar. instance, 190 225]. fiction 'implicit acquittal' ibid., equally sentence: former 'badness' gravity only, therefore merited punishment.. 70 "If, practicality, consequences effected guise augmentation factors render route forbidden Clause? comprehend 'sentences'-as 'offenses'-for prisoner commences vacating one. 306-307 [51 354] (1931); 168, 173 [21 872] (1874)." 746-747, 2086. 71 wooden extrapolation "variously verbalized," 2078, irrelevant 72 BRENNAN written wrote 1969, provides, case: "(a) Whenever attorney felony age twenty-one attorney, acceptance nolo con- tendere, sign file amend, (1) specifying subsection section, (2) setting particularity believes shall felony, [or] disclosed jury. "(b) Upon contendere hearing sitting fix thereof ten thereto. counsel represented counsel, inspect report verification. connection assistance compulsory process, cross-examination witnesses appear duly authenticated copy commitment prima facie commitment. preponderance information submitted relies upon, exceed twenty-five disproportionate felony. Otherwise prescribing penalties findings, identification making "(e) purposes section if- "(3) furtherance of, persons engage laws jurisdiction, did, agreed would, initiate, organize, plan, finance, direct, manage, supervise conduct, give bribe ". paragraphs (3) subsection, forms acts results, participants, victims, methods commission, interrelated distinguishing characteristic[s] isolated events. "(f) confinement required reads follows: "With respect imposition, correction, reduction chapter, expiration diligently prosecuted. may, notice, extend thirty prescribed law. period. deemed defendant. Review include lawful, erroneous, abused. considering entire affirm direct remand Failure shall, correction foreclose withdrawal reviewed writing disposition showing abuse review." twin 849(h). enacted 409(h) Comprehensive Drug Abuse Prevention 91-513, 1266. "[N]or person offence limb. U.S.Const., Amdt. 5. Academic professional commentary divided. conclusions Clause, Westen, Three Faces Jeopardy: Reflections Sentences, Mich.L.Rev. 1001 Stern, Response Arbitrary Unreasonable Am.Crim.L.Rev. unconstitutional, Spence, Reform Prosecutorial Jeopardy?, Md.L.Rev. 739 Freeman Earley, DiFrancesco: Va.L.Rev. 325 Bus.Lawyer 617, 624-628 commentator-witness ago answer "simply unclear." Low, Special Offender Sentencing, Am.Crim.L.Q. 70, (1970) (reprint Hearings S. et al. Subcommittee Laws Procedures Senate Committee Judiciary, 91st Cong., 1st Sess., 197 (1969)). ABA Standards 20-1.1(d), appended commentary, 20-7 20-13 (2d 1980). 1962 $25,000 both, plus forfeitures. 1963. 1361 violation, damage exceeds $100, $10,000 both. 842(j) $1,000 844(b). 371 object misdemeanor, applicability respondent, concurring passing, "properly applicable." 780-781, n. 13. considered, doing, remand. summarized sum, finds crimes committed; felonies; (18 1962(c)); 1962(d)); substantive four .; York (New Penal Code, Article 150) 1341); manage acts; [and 1962(d) defendant.] "WHEREFORE, DiFrancesco, October 31, commission felonies sections 3575(e)(3) 3575(f) Code." 43-44. bracketed phrase typed, line drawn ink hand. persuasive explanation deletion, one, indicated oral argument, Tr. Oral Arg. 5, 37, 39, briefs, Brief 12, Appeals, 781, n.17, Inasmuch ago, indicate little prosecutorial constitutionality, unnecessary. definitive explanation, offered. explain nonuse speculation, indulge recital "favorite saying jeopardy" comment, uncritical, Professor Westen's provocative thoughtful article, 1001, 1062-1063 describes succinctly way: prerogative 1012, 1063. And, surely settled Fourteenth Benton Maryland, 784, 2056, 707 2264, Philippines, accepted "as relevant principles." n.15, 1023, (1975). dissent fails Pearce. According "analytic sentence" Post, 146. dissent's precisely unsuccessfully Justices Douglas 726-728, n.1, 2081-2089, n.1 (Douglas, J., concurring); 744-746, 2085-2086 (Harlan, rejected operates implied n.16, n.16. Further, distinguish unconvincing. included retrial; operated greater. reached explained operate Stevens' 744, 2085, wrongly decided. inclined overrule Somewhat Murphy 177 155, 639, 641, 711 (1900), plurality (1957). latter read establishing procedure. bill introduced 30, 3577 Measures Relating Crime: 28-29 advised language needed omitted. 196, n.18. Cornell L.Rev. 715, 730 part: "[A] 2190, Sanges, 310, 609, (1892). my technically improper always allowed. 165-167, 648-649, (1947). dismisses (1874), "gratuitously," 138, opined. true somewhat decide Benz' citation then, entirely appropriate. Berman 302 211, 212, 164, 165, 204 (1937) (Sentence appealable notwithstanding suspension execution. "Final judgment"); Corey 375 169, 298, 229 (1963). 'attaches acquittal,' 129, 2193, 'we decision,' 130, 2149, (1978) (1962) (directed middle unreviewable "based foundation"). explains reinstate postverdict indictment. reinstatement adjudication. However, proper Another innocent, [a Repeated likely produce unjustifiably harsh unwarranted verdict. instances, seeks instance. ("The sentence"). months ending June 1979, 32,913 Courts, 27,295 contendere. Director Administrative Office Courts 286 meted bargain prosecutors rights, determining bargain. appealable. Finality retrials verdicts. n.8, "sound administration justice. Corresponding fair societal punishing 1589, implicate identified Tateo. simply low. below noted, serving "granted punishment." terminated, unless consented introduction contemplates evidentiary nn.1 8, appellant outcome contemplated presently presumably due event.

Category: 0