Please ensure Javascript is enabled for purposes of website accessibility

Criminal Procedure — double jeopardy

By: WISCONSIN LAW JOURNAL STAFF//February 15, 2012//

Criminal Procedure — double jeopardy

By: WISCONSIN LAW JOURNAL STAFF//February 15, 2012//

Listen to this article

United States Court of Appeals For the Seventh Circuit

Criminal

Criminal Procedure — double jeopardy

Convictions for both receipt and possession of child pornography do not violate the Double Jeopardy Clause.

“In this case, the government did not allege at trial, and does not now argue, that the same pornography formed the bases of the separate offenses, and that only the storage medium differed; rather, the government argued to the jury and presented evidence that there were different download dates for each video. We have, in the multiplicity context, found that even where the indictment contains overlapping time periods, the government’s evidence at trial can support a finding of separate violations. See United States v. Snyder, 189 F.3d 640, 647 (7th Cir. 1999) (finding that the Double Jeopardy Clause was not implicated in a multiplicity challenge where ‘the indictment alleges that the violations occurred over a nine-month period between January and October 1996, and the government presented evidence that Snyder committed numerous separate acts during this period’).”

Affirmed in part, and Vacated in part.

10-2337 U.S. v. Halliday

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Central District of Illinois, McCuskey, J., Williams, J.

Polls

Should Steven Avery be granted a new evidentiary hearing?

View Results

Loading ... Loading ...

Legal News

See All Legal News

WLJ People

Sea all WLJ People

Opinion Digests