The U.S. Supreme Court has refused to rule on the "Double
Jeopardy" drunk driving defense, rejecting an appeal from Maryland's
highest court.
The Court's action wasn't surprising, because there isn't a split
among the circuits or the state high courts. For the Court to grant
certiorari without such a split, "Lightning would have to strike,"
says Larry Yackle, a law professor at Boston University.
It's also possible that the Court declined review because it will
address the issue later this year when it rules on two civil
forfeiture cases from the Sixth and Ninth Circuits, says the
attorney who filed the petition for certiorari, Leonard Stamm
of Greenbelt, Maryland.
Meanwhile, another appeals court in Texas rejected the defense.
Like most of the other courts that have rejected it, the Texas court
said that a license suspension isn't "punishment" for purposes of
double jeopardy, but is a remedial measure designed to protect the
public.
The defense is that, once a driver's license has been suspended,
a subsequent criminal trial would be double jeopardy.
U.S. Supreme Court. Jones v. Maryland, No. 95-1131. Certiorari
denied, March 18, 1996. No written opinion.
Texas Court of Appeals, 9th District. Champagne v. State, No.
09-95-145-CR. March 6, 1996. Lawyers Weekly USA No. 9907770) (7
pages). To order a copy of the opinion, call 800-933-5594.