9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals
Oct. 16, 2019
Officer likely safe from liability over putting defendant in double jeopardy
An appellate panel seemed skeptical about claims a CHP officer’s renewed investigation makes him liable under double jeopardy.
A 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals panel voiced skepticism Tuesday over whether a plaintiff was entitled to damages for being placed into double jeopardy when a California Highway Patrol officer instigated a renewed investigation after the plaintiff was cleared of a speeding offense in traffic court.
Counsel for James Wilkinson argued patrolman Mark Magrann violated Wilkinson's constitutional rights by pushing for a perjury prosecu...
For only $95 a month (the price of 2 article purchases)
Receive unlimited article access and full access to our archives,
Daily Appellate Report, award winning columns, and our
Verdicts and Settlements.
Or
$795 for an entire year!
Or access this article for $45
(Purchase provides 7-day access to this article. Printing, posting or downloading is not allowed.)
Already a subscriber?
Sign In
Enewsletter Sign-up
Related Content
Criminal Law and Procedure
Wilkinson v. Gingrich
State court unreasonably applies rule of collateral estoppel when it upholds perjury conviction after defendant's acquittal in traffic court.
