i need help on 2 questions. heres the scenario,
Connie Craft lives in Stockton, which is located in San Joaquin County in California. She stole a new computer from her neighbor's home and was arrested within an hour in her own home, where the computer was immediately found. Assume that the crime is a felony under California’s state statutes, that all proper legal procedures have been followed, and that she is about to be tried for the first time in a California state court.
Ok the questions i have are....
1) Suppose Connie’s conduct is a theft offense under federal law because there is also a federal statute which makes stealing a computer a federal crime. Which federal court has jurisdiction over the felony criminal prosecution of Connie for the federal offense? Why?
2)Assuming Connie’s crime is both a state and a federal crime, would trying Connie once in state court and again in federal court for the same action constitute double jeopardy? Why or why not? Assume the preemption doctrine does not apply.
thanks!
Although this is not my area of expertise, it would seem that the state would be the one to prosecute, since no state lines have been crossed. I don't think the federal statutes become effective unless the burglary involves more than one state.
Since this is not my area of expertise, I searched Google under the key words "federal state prosecution" to get these possible sources:
http://72.14.253.104/search?q=cache:egU2v-lKADsJ:www.law.harvard.edu/students/opia/docs/guide-sizing-up-prosecution.pdf+federal+state+prosecution&hl=en&ct=clnk&cd=3&gl=us&client=safari
http://www.journals.uchicago.edu/LSI/journal/issues/v30n2/302003/302003.web.pdf?erFrom=1170573116265279725Guest
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prosecutor
I hope this helps. Thanks for asking.
1) In the scenario provided, if Connie's conduct is considered a theft offense under federal law, then the federal court that would have jurisdiction over the felony criminal prosecution of Connie for the federal offense would depend on certain factors. The primary factor would be whether the burglary involves crossing state lines or has any connection to interstate commerce. If the theft offense somehow involves interstate commerce or crosses state lines, then it would fall under federal jurisdiction. In that case, a federal district court would have jurisdiction over the felony criminal prosecution.
To confirm this information and have a more accurate understanding, I recommend consulting reliable legal sources or seeking guidance from legal professionals who specialize in federal criminal law. They would be able to provide a more detailed explanation and specific application of federal jurisdiction in such cases.
2) If Connie's crime is both a state and federal offense, trying her once in state court and again in federal court for the same action would generally not constitute double jeopardy, assuming the preemption doctrine does not apply. The double jeopardy clause in the Fifth Amendment of the United States Constitution protects individuals from being prosecuted twice for the same offense. However, the double jeopardy clause does not prevent both state and federal governments from prosecuting a person for the same act or conduct if they are considered separate offenses under each sovereignty.
The principle of dual sovereignty allows both the state and federal governments to exercise their independent jurisdiction and prosecute an individual for the same criminal act, as long as each offense is considered separate and distinct by both the state and federal laws. This means that even if Connie is tried and acquitted or convicted in state court, the federal government can still initiate its own separate prosecution for the federal offense committed.
It is essential to note that legal principles and interpretations can vary, and specific cases may present unique circumstances or exceptions. If you require precise legal advice or information regarding this matter, it is highly recommended to consult with experienced legal professionals who specialize in criminal law and are familiar with the relevant federal and state statutes. They can provide accurate guidance based on the specific details of the case.