Court Opinion

ID: 9578805
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-21 21:48:38.422715+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T13:33:30.372849
License: Public Domain

Rosellini, J.
(concurring with Hicks, J.) — I concur with Justice Hicks that the retrial of a defendant is precluded by the rule that one may not be placed twice in jeopardy for the same offense. When the greater offense is dismissed, all of the included offenses are dismissed.
Otherwise, the prosecutor could charge a defendant with first-degree murder; if he were acquitted, he could be charged with second-degree murder; and then if he were acquitted, he could be charged with manslaughter, all included offenses. This would make a mockery of the rule on double jeopardy.
I would adopt the Oregon rule in State v. Brown, 262 Ore. 442, 458, 497 P.2d 1191 (1972), where it is held that
a second prosecution is for the "same offense" and is prohibited if (1) the charges arise out of the same act or transaction, and (2) the charges could have been tried in the same court [at the same time], and.(3) the prosecutor knew or reasonably should have known of the facts relevant to the second charge at the time of the original prosecution.
*930This rule comports with the spirit of the doctrine of double jeopardy.
Williams, J., concurs with Rosellini, J.