17 ms·

Is he on trial again after an appeals court already found him not guilty? The article is a little unclear on that point. First it says he's suing Goldman to re

Is he on trial again after an appeals court already found him not guilty? The article is a little unclear on that point. First it says he's suing Goldman to recoup losses, and then at the end it says: Aleynikov has pleaded not guilty and is waiting for his trial in New York State Court. Does "not guilty" refer to the trial in which he's suing them? Or is there another trial even though he's already been found not guilty (double jeopardy)?

sanxiyn 13y ago
United States recognizes a legal doctrine of dual sovereignity, so a state can try what the federal government already tried.
- tsaoutourpants 13y ago
  ...also known as "we carved yet another exception into the clearly worded text of the Constitution"
  - rayiner 13y ago
    The Bill of Rights, like most of the Constitution except clearly identified provisions, wasn't originally intended to apply to the states. It was only in the 20th century that the Supreme Court started the process of incorporating provisions of the Bill of Rights to the states via the equal protection clause of the 14th amendment (which was a reconstruction amendment explicitly imposing restrictions on the states). So the clear text of the Constitution, as the drafters understood it, did not prohibit concurrent federal and state criminal trials for the same crime. Indeed, it imposed no limits on state criminal procedure at all. No due process, no nothing.
lambda 13y ago
Yes, he's on trial now for violating state laws, since the appeals court ruled that the federal laws in question did not apply to his case. So, he's been found not to be guilty of those particular federal crimes, but there may be state crimes that he could still be found guilty of. They are separate jurisdictions and separate laws, so it doesn't count as double jeopardy.

17 ms·

Is he on trial again after an appeals court already found him not guilty? The article is a little unclear on that point. First it says he's suing Goldman to re

by sillysaurus2 13y ago

sanxiyn 13y ago
United States recognizes a legal doctrine of dual sovereignity, so a state can try what the federal government already tried.
- tsaoutourpants 13y ago
  ...also known as "we carved yet another exception into the clearly worded text of the Constitution"
  - rayiner 13y ago
    The Bill of Rights, like most of the Constitution except clearly identified provisions, wasn't originally intended to apply to the states. It was only in the 20th century that the Supreme Court started the process of incorporating provisions of the Bill of Rights to the states via the equal protection clause of the 14th amendment (which was a reconstruction amendment explicitly imposing restrictions on the states). So the clear text of the Constitution, as the drafters understood it, did not prohibit concurrent federal and state criminal trials for the same crime. Indeed, it imposed no limits on state criminal procedure at all. No due process, no nothing.
lambda 13y ago
Yes, he's on trial now for violating state laws, since the appeals court ruled that the federal laws in question did not apply to his case. So, he's been found not to be guilty of those particular federal crimes, but there may be state crimes that he could still be found guilty of. They are separate jurisdictions and separate laws, so it doesn't count as double jeopardy.