Renico v. Lett
Docket No. | Op. Below | Argument | Opinion | Vote | Author | Term |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
09-338 | 6th Cir. | Mar 29, 2010 | May 3, 2010 | 6-3 | Roberts | OT 2009 |
Holding: Under the Double Jeopardy Clause, a criminal defendant can be subjected to a new trial if the jury in his original trial was deadlocked and could not reach a unanimous verdict. In this case, a state court ordered a new trial after finding an initial jury deadlocked, and in the second trial, the defendant was convicted. A federal court overturned the conviction after concluding that the trial court did not try hard enough to get the first jury to reach a unanimous verdict. The Supreme Court reversed, holding that the federal court did not give enough deference to the state trial court’s judgment about whether the first jury was truly deadlocked.
Judgment: Reversed and Remanded, 6-3, in an opinion by Chief Justice John Roberts on May 3, 2010. Justice Stevens dissented, joined by Justice Sotomayor and in part by Justice Breyer.
SCOTUSblog Coverage
- Court strikes down Sixth Circuit grant of habeas relief based on Double Jeopardy Clause (Anna Christensen, May 4, 2010)
- A burden too heavy for the habeas petitioner under AEDPA? (Erin Miller, April 1, 2010)
- When are a mistrial and retrial double jeopardy? (Erin Miller, March 28, 2010)
Briefs and Documents
Merits Briefs
- Brief for Petitioner Paul Renico
- Brief for Respondent Reginald Lett
- Reply Brief for Petitioner Paul Renico
Certiorari-Stage Documents
Merits Briefs
- Brief for Petitioner Paul Renico
- Brief for Respondent Reginald Lett
- Reply Brief for Petitioner Paul Renico