Analysis of Double Jeopardy's Role in the US Criminal Justice System

This paper delves into the concept of double jeopardy within the US criminal justice system, examining its significance and the protections it provides. The assignment begins by outlining the Fifth Amendment's role in preventing repeated prosecutions and the benefits of this clause, including the protection of individuals from harassment and the prevention of monetary, emotional, and communal consequences. It highlights the case of United States vs. Felix [1992] 503 U.S. 378, which established that a wrongdoing and conspiracy to commit that wrongdoing are not identical for the purposes of double jeopardy. The paper also references the Grady vs. Corbin [1990] case. This assignment provides a detailed analysis of double jeopardy, offering insights into its impact on the US criminal justice system.

Running head: PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION
Public Administration
Name of the Student
Name of the University
Authors Note

1PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION
Significance of Double Jeopardy in the US
Justice is delivered to the people, who have committed crime through the process of
criminal justice. The objective of criminal justice includes prevention of crime, mental support to
the victims, and rehabilitation of wrongdoers. This paper aims to discuss the significance of
double jeopardy in the US criminal justice.
The clause of ‘double jeopardy’ was inserted in the US Constitution through the Fifth
Amendment in order to prohibit the state from trying a person twice for the same offence after
acquittal of that person. This clause limits the possibility of repeated prosecution by the
government (Rugh, 2015). The defense of double jeopardy has been supported by many authors
only because of its benefits, such as it protects the individuals from being tried twice. It also
protects individuals from harassment by the both the federal and state government.
It has been observed that this defense is supported and considered to be important due to
its immense benefit. According to this clause, if an individual is charged for a criminal offense
and new proof has found by the police related to the same case, the court cannot try that
individual again for similar crime. Apart from this, another benefit of this clause is that it
protects a person from monetary, emotional, and communal consequences of consecutive trial
(Davis, 2016).
In the famous case of United States vs. Felix [1992] 503 U.S. 378, a landmark judgment
had been given by the Supreme Court of the U.S. by considering the view of Grady vs. Corbin
[1990] case that a wrongdoing and a conspiracy to commit that wrongdoing are not identical for
the purposes of double jeopardy.

2PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION
Reference
Davis, F.T., 2016. International Double Jeopardy: US Prosecutions and the Developing Law in
Europe. Am. U. Int'l L. Rev., 31, p.57.
Rugh, J. S. (2015). Double jeopardy: Why Latinos were hit hardest by the US foreclosure
crisis. Social Forces, 93(3), 1139-1184.