This Note argues that the Double Jeopardy Clause bars retrial after reversals of convictions tainted by prosecutorial misconduct in the submission of evidence when two conditions are met: (1) the prosecutor intentionally introduced tainted evidence, and (2) excluding the tainted evidence would have left insufficient evidence at trial to support the defendant's conviction. This Note contends that this limited extension of double jeopardy protection is both mandated by the policies underlying the Double Jeopardy Clause and consistent with existing double jeopardy jurisprudence.
Rick A. Bierschbach,
One Bite at the Apple: Reversals of Convictions Tainted by Prosecutorial Misconduct and the Ban on Double Jeopardy,
Mich. L. Rev.
Available at: https://repository.law.umich.edu/mlr/vol94/iss5/7