Supreme Court Case Blueford v. Arkansas began in February 2012. The state of Arkansas charged Alex Blueford for the death of a one year old child. The charge included capital murder, first-degree murder, manslaughter, and negligent homicide. The jury was presented with a verdict form that allowed the jury either to convict Blueford of one of the charged offenses, or acquit him of all charges. The jury unanimously voted against capital murder and first-degree murder but could not agree on a verdict for manslaughter and negligent homicide. After a few hours, the jury announced they could not reach a verdict. Since the jury could not agree on the last two charges, the judge had no choice but to declare a mistrial. Arkansas requested to retry Blueford on all charges. Blueford tried to get the capital murder and first-degree murder charges dismissed under the double jeopardy clause. His motion was denied, because the Supreme Court held that the jury’s decision to acquit Blueford on capital and first-degree murder charges was “unofficial” and therefore, did not constitute a formal acquittal for double jeopardy purposes.
Chief Justice Roberts delivered the opinion that “The Double Jeopardy Clause protects against being tried twice for the same offense. The Clause does not, however, bar a second trial if the first ended in a mistrial.” I agree with Chief Justice Roberts, the double jeopardy clause does not apply to cases that declares a mistrial. Since the jury did not reach a verdict of manslaughter and negligent homicide, Blueford was not convicted or acquitted of capital and first-degree murder so the judge had to declare a mistrial. Technically Blueford was not tried since there was no official acquittal or charge against him so the double jeopardy clause would not apply in this case.
Case Background: November 28, 2007, Alex Blueford was babysitting his girlfriend’s one year old when the child suffered a severe head injury. Blueford says he was on his bed taking a phone call when the child waved a lit cigarette near his face and startled him, knocking the child to the floor. The child was rushed to the hospital and a few days later died from the injuries.
Elizabeth, I agree with you that the Supreme Court and Chief Justice Roberts made a correct decision in this case. I feel that Chief Justice Roberts’ reasoning is correct, that since the jury did not officially convict or acquit Mr. Blueford he should face a second trial. I can see where Blueford is coming from in regards to the idea that he faced trial, the jury came to a verdict on a couple charges but not the rest, thus concluding the idea he already had faced his trial and should be acquitted. But like Chief Justice Roberts said, the jury never made an official ruling; they reached a verdict in discussion but couldn’t reach a verdict on the other charges thus resulting in a mistrial, and in this case open to a second trial. A very interesting case on how double jeopardy does not come into play, I would have never thought that because a jury never reached a full verdict on each of the charges that he/she could be retried without the issue of double jeopardy. Great post and good read!
ReplyDelete-Jonathan Hanje