After the District Court had found respondent guilty at a bench
trial, double jeopardy did not bar the Government' appeal from the
District Court's order suppressing certain evidence, entered upon
reconsideration of respondent's motion to suppress, which was
originally denied.
United States v. Morrison, ante, p.
429 U. S. 1.
Certiorari granted; vacated ad remanded.
PER CURIAM.
The operative facts herein are substantially identical to those
in
United States v. Morrison, ante, p.
429 U. S. 1.
Respondent's car was stopped by Border Patrol agents; a search
disclosed marihuana. Respondent lost a motion to suppress, and was
found guilty after a bench trial. Following this trial, but before
sentencing, the District Court, relying upon our decision in
Almeida-Sanchez v. United States, 413 U.
S. 266 (1973), granted respondent's motion to suppress.
The Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit, as it did in
Morrison, found the Government's appeal barred by double
jeopardy.
In
United States v. Wilson, 420 U.
S. 332 (1975), we held that double jeopardy would not
bar a Government appeal if success on that appeal would result in
the reinstatement of a verdict of guilty. The fact that the order
of suppression here occurred after a general finding of guilt
rendered by the court in a bench trial, rather than after a return
of a verdict of guilty by a jury, is immaterial.
Morrison,
ante, p.
429 U. S. 1. Double
jeopardy, therefore, does not bar an appeal by the Government.
We grant the motion to proceed
in forma pauperis and
the petition for certiorari, vacate the judgment of the Court of
Appeals, and remand to that court for proceedings consistent
herewith.
It is so ordered.
Comments
Be the first to comment
Leave a Comment