|
Post by Stormyweather on Jan 10, 2008 17:05:49 GMT -6
Lisa Montgomery was tried, convicted and sentenced to death in Federal Court for kidnapping resulting in death. My question is can she also be charged and tried in the state of Missouri for 1st degree murder?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 24, 2008 7:38:04 GMT -6
If the murder took place in Missouri (I don't know whether it did or not), she could be charged and tried for first-degree murder by the State of Missouri. As I understand the law, Missouri and the federal government are considered "dual sovereigns" and, therefore, double jeopardy doesn't apply. So, if she gets acquitted during a first trial, Missouri can't try her for the same crime again and likewise for the feds. However, she can be tried, convicted and sentenced to death for what is essentially the same crime by both Missouri and the feds. Simply put, she could end up with both a Missouri death sentence and a federal death sentence.
|
|
Rand
Banned
PRO-DP
Posts: 1,839
|
Post by Rand on May 6, 2008 13:29:06 GMT -6
I have one question. When does someone get judged by federal law / court ? Is it because crimes were comitted in two (or several) different states ?
|
|
|
Post by D.E.E. on May 6, 2008 14:07:38 GMT -6
I have one question. When does someone get judged by federal law / court ? Is it because crimes were comitted in two (or several) different states ? The law that was broken has to be either Federal or State, it can be both or only one. Kidnapping that results in death falls under Federal law, while murder in this case fall under state law simple murder would not have placed it under Federal law.
|
|
Rand
Banned
PRO-DP
Posts: 1,839
|
Post by Rand on May 6, 2008 14:15:40 GMT -6
The law that was broken has to be either Federal or State, it can be both or only one. Kidnapping that results in death falls under Federal law, while murder in this case fall under state law simple murder would not have placed it under Federal law. Really ? That's strange ! And why (only ?) kidnapping ? Do you have some other examples ?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 6, 2008 14:27:08 GMT -6
The law that was broken has to be either Federal or State, it can be both or only one. Kidnapping that results in death falls under Federal law, while murder in this case fall under state law simple murder would not have placed it under Federal law. Really ? That's strange ! And why (only ?) kidnapping ? Do you have some other examples ? www.courttv.com/archive/legaldocs/capital/map/penalty.htmlon this page you can click on each state or federal or military to see the capital eligible crimes for the jurisdiction Note: I found this link in the Info and Resources tab above. Char has provided a lot of good information in those areas.
|
|
Rand
Banned
PRO-DP
Posts: 1,839
|
Post by Rand on May 6, 2008 16:52:39 GMT -6
www.courttv.com/archive/legaldocs/capital/map/penalty.htmlon this page you can click on each state or federal or military to see the capital eligible crimes for the jurisdiction Note: I found this link in the Info and Resources tab above. Char has provided a lot of good information in those areas. Thanks for the link, it seems interesting.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 8, 2008 9:10:31 GMT -6
Federal crimes have either some crossing of states lines or some link (however tenuous) to interstate commerce.
|
|
|
Post by D.E.E. on May 8, 2008 10:40:00 GMT -6
Federal crimes have either some crossing of states lines or some link (however tenuous) to interstate commerce. as a rule that is true but there are other reasons as well, such as kidnapping, killing of a federal officer, and a few others. Kiddnapping goes back to the Lindenburg case as to when it became Federal, at least that is what I recall reading.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 9, 2008 3:05:48 GMT -6
Hauptmann lived in New York and the kidnapping was in New Jersey. So, there was definitely some crossing of state lines in the furtherance of the crime (including disposal of the ransom I believe).
|
|
|
Post by D.E.E. on May 9, 2008 14:51:12 GMT -6
Hauptmann lived in New York and the kidnapping was in New Jersey. So, there was definitely some crossing of state lines in the furtherance of the crime (including disposal of the ransom I believe). This is true but it is where the kidnapping became a Federal Issue. The body was found in New Jersey under his porch as I recall. So there was not any actual interstate movement of the crime only the criminal.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 7, 2008 19:28:37 GMT -6
Interstate kidnapping is a federal issue .. not state kidnapping unless killed in a federal facility and yes she can be tried in missouri too, as the guy said before state and federal are separate and sovereign, douple jeopardy applies only to federal government but no state constitution can violate double jeopardy.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 20, 2008 20:01:06 GMT -6
Hauptmann lived in New York and the kidnapping was in New Jersey. So, there was definitely some crossing of state lines in the furtherance of the crime (including disposal of the ransom I believe). This is true but it is where the kidnapping became a Federal Issue. The body was found in New Jersey under his porch as I recall. So there was not any actual interstate movement of the crime only the criminal. I believe that when there's a crossing of state lines in the furtherance of the crime (as in the Hauptmann case), that's sufficient to make it federal. Where the victim was murdered and where his body was left aren't the sole controlling factors.
|
|
|
Post by Stormyweather on Dec 21, 2008 19:00:36 GMT -6
I have one question. When does someone get judged by federal law / court ? Is it because crimes were comitted in two (or several) different states ? The law that was broken has to be either Federal or State, it can be both or only one. Kidnapping that results in death falls under Federal law, while murder in this case fall under state law simple murder would not have placed it under Federal law. Terry Nichols was tried in both Federal and Oklahoma courts.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 21, 2008 23:36:19 GMT -6
I think much of the confusion over the dual-sovereign wrinkle of double jeopardy has to do with the fact that it seems to violate the spirit of the law if not the letter. After a state acquittal, a defendant can be tried a second time in federal court for what is essentially the same underlying crime. Understandably, most people would say this is a clear-cut violation of the double-jeopardy clause, but the fact is that, legally speaking, it just isn't.
|
|
mst3k4evur
Inactive
Member of the Month - 4/09
Ameeerrrrrricaaa, F**k Yah!
Posts: 3,701
|
Post by mst3k4evur on Dec 22, 2008 12:55:05 GMT -6
The law that was broken has to be either Federal or State, it can be both or only one. Kidnapping that results in death falls under Federal law, while murder in this case fall under state law simple murder would not have placed it under Federal law. Terry Nichols was tried in both Federal and Oklahoma courts. Yes, but for different crimes. He was tried in Federal courts for building a WMD and killing eight federal agents and then in state court for killing the other 160 victims.
|
|
|
Post by Stormyweather on Dec 22, 2008 13:09:04 GMT -6
Terry Nichols was tried in both Federal and Oklahoma courts. Yes, but for different crimes. He was tried in Federal courts for building a WMD and killing eight federal agents and then in state court for killing the other 160 victims. Yes, but you know as well as me, that they were trying to get him on death row. Lisa was charged federally kidnapping resulting in death. I was wondering if she could be charged for premeditated murder by the state of Missouri.
|
|
|
Post by lawrence on Jan 5, 2009 7:56:26 GMT -6
Gosh, Ive a head ache, this all seems very complicated. Can i ask a question? What if a murder takes place in a state that has the death penalty and the murderer escapes, crosses over a state line into another state and commits a murder there and this state does not have the DP, what then? I am assuming (correct me if I'm wrong) that there is no such thing as a state extraditing order, or is there? who would have jurisdiction over this scumbag? can a state refuse to extradite a criminal to another state that has the DP if that state doesn't if you know what i mean , now Ive definitely got a headache ;D
|
|
|
Post by Californian on Jan 5, 2009 8:58:46 GMT -6
Gosh, Ive a head ache, this all seems very complicated. Can i ask a question? What if a murder takes place in a state that has the death penalty and the murderer escapes, crosses over a state line into another state and commits a murder there and this state does not have the DP, what then? I am assuming (correct me if I'm wrong) that there is no such thing as a state extraditing order, or is there? who would have jurisdiction over this scumbag? can a state refuse to extradite a criminal to another state that has the DP if that state doesn't if you know what i mean , now Ive definitely got a headache ;D Lawrence: extradition between states is mandatory. It's in the Constitution. The feds have jurisdiction everywhere. Jurisdiction between states in intrastate crimes is often negotiated, with the state having the best evidence usually getting to try the criminal. This is especially true between non-DP and DP states. However, trial by several states in possible, as are death sentences in several states. See Alton Coleman and Debra Brown (Ohio and Indiana) for instance.
|
|
|
Post by lawrence on Jan 6, 2009 1:41:58 GMT -6
Thanks Cali, thats cleared a few things up. ive a small but obviously not overly complicated version of the constition. Man on the internet when i looked, its a hell of a big document with ammendments etc but i couldnt find that info anywhere, as for the Feds, i take it thats the FBI? So they have juristriction for internal affairs concerning murder.
The reason why i asked this question was because on New Years Eve i took my son and his girlfriend to Gatwick airport as she was returning home to Canada and whilst in the waiting room i found a copy of the NYT's and there was a report on a murderer being protected by an attorney in one state that doesnt have the DP and she was fighting the case on the grounds that he would be executed if sent to this other State. Forgive me but i really cant remember the names of the states, i think it was west coast, Deleware or New York. Ive tried to find this story on the internet but because i dont perscribe to the NYT i couldnt read more about it.
Interesting though so thanks for that.
|
|
|
Post by lawrence on Jan 6, 2009 1:50:10 GMT -6
Sorry East coast, its early here
|
|
|
Post by Californian on Jan 6, 2009 9:08:24 GMT -6
Thanks Cali, thats cleared a few things up. ive a small but obviously not overly complicated version of the constition. Man on the internet when i looked, its a hell of a big document with ammendments etc but i couldnt find that info anywhere, as for the Feds, i take it thats the FBI? So they have juristriction for internal affairs concerning murder. Yep, the FBI is our national police force and has juridiction in any state or U.S. territory for violation of federal laws, many of which overlap state laws. I can't ever recall a case in which a governor refused to sign an extradition order. Defendants are asked to waive as a formality, but whether they waive or not, to my knowledge, they go. I suppose a governor of a non-DP state could refuse, and then if the requesting state wanted the defendant bad enough they would go to the SCOTUS for a writ of mandamus. (Actions between states are heard in SCOTUS). No sweat.
|
|