[Fr_Chuck]

Ok, I am having trouble understanding something,

I know you are suppose to be able to be tried twice for the same charge.
But it appears in some cases when a crime is both a state crime and a federal crime, you can be charged in both state and Federal court.

I have a friend ( really ) and they have plead guilty to a weapons charge in Georgia and they are serving time for that weapons charge now.
But the Feds came in today and got the weapon from Ga evidence and are threatening to charge the person on federal weapons charges from the same crime that they already plead guilty too.

Something just seems wrong to me. They will be getting a public defender but one will not be assigned until they actually charge this person, and since they are in prison, no legal aid is available to go to.
So they can't get to see an attorney until charges are already filed.
** one of the bad things of not having money.

Anyone else heard of something like this happening??

[Fr_Chuck]

Bringing it back to the top of the page, I was hopeing to at least hear from excon or a couple of our attorneys on their ideas

[ScottGem]

DOUBLE JEOPARDY - Being tried twice for the same offense; prohibited by the 5th Amendmentto the U.S. Constitution
5th Amendment:
Nor shall any person be subject for the same offense to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb

However, two laws were broken, a state law and a federal law. Each law is a different "offense". Even though the laws may be very similar and even though its really the same crime, its not the same offense.

[excon]

even though its really the same crime, its not the same offense.

Hello Padre:

Therein lies the rub. Is it not the same offense because the feds are charging them? Or isn't it the same offense because the feds have a different name for it? I don't know, and I wouldn't trust 'em.

Plus, the devil is in the details. Of course, the charging agency is going to say there were two different crimes, but that doesn't mean there were. The feds, at least, will give them a better lawyer than the state would when and if he's charged.

If he's being denied parole because of the federal hold, he can move the court to handle his case NOW.

Plus, you say they're just making threats. That means they want something. Otherwise they'd just charge him.

excon

[CaptainRich]

My understanding is the issue is likely one of jurisdiction. The state charges are different from the Fed's.

Another aspect may be the introduction of new, more compelling evidence that the Fed's wants brought to bear in this case.

After that, there's also a chance to be charged civilly for the same infraction.

[s_cianci]

They probably get around it through semantics, by charging the suspect with two different crimes ; one state and the other federal. Call it a slightly different name and you've technically got two different offenses, albeit the same evidence used in each. I suppose someone could challenge it under double jeopardy and hopefully get a sympathetic judge who'll then set a precedent limiting the ability to charge one with both a state and a federal crime for the same incident.

[Fr_Chuck]

Yes,

A known felon, while high on drugs I believe got a gun and was shotting it up in the air.

State did drug charges plus felon in possession of a fire arm under the state statues. ** Person plead guilty and is serving sentence.

Now the Feds ( FBI) have come in and want to charge him with felon in possession of a firearm under federal laws. And they are going to use the guilty plea from the state charge as proof he is guilty of the federal charge.
Sorry I am very pro law enforcement, but this just does not seem right.

[s_cianci]

In keeping with the spirit of the 5th amendment it probably isn't right. But for whatever reason the authorities don't see it that way and both the stateys and the feds want to take a bite at the apple. And no judge is going to stop it until an attorney with sufficient gumption argues that it is in fact a violation of the 5th amendment, in spirit if not in letter.