Paschal v. State
Supreme Court of Arkansas
1Dissent
Conley Byrd, Justice.
I dissent to that part of the opinion remanding this case for a new trial. I do so because it constitutes double jeopardy. In so dissenting I recognize that all reversals for new trials do not constitute double jeopardy.
Here the jury was impaneled and sworn. After the evidence was heard appellant moved for a directed verdict which we now hold the trial court should have granted because there was no legal evidence to sustain a conviction. If the trial court had granted the motion, appellant would have been discharged and former jeopardy would have attached.
In Whitmore v.…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- Whitmore v. StateSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1884
- State v. GraySupreme Court of Arkansas · 1923
- State v. TaylorSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1929