California
How Benton v. Maryland applies in California: state-specific rules, key cases, and bar exam notes for Criminal Law.
California follows principles similar to those established in Benton v. Maryland, ensuring that double jeopardy protections are upheld under both the state and federal constitutions. California courts reinforce this principle through the interpretation of the California Constitution's provision on double jeopardy.
California penal law maintains that an individual cannot be tried for the same offense following an acquittal or conviction, consistent with both the federal Double Jeopardy Clause and Article I, Section 15 of the California Constitution.
The court held that retrial after a mistrial without the defendant's consent violated double jeopardy protections.
The ruling confirmed that a guilty plea does not waive the defendant's double jeopardy rights in subsequent prosecutions.
The court determined that re-prosecution for an offense after a hung jury is permissible only under strict conditions set out by California law.
California's approach mirrors the federal standard established in Benton v. Maryland, emphasizing the constitutional guarantee against double jeopardy. However, California courts have further clarified specific applications of this principle, especially regarding pleas and retrials.
Double jeopardy principles from Benton v. Maryland are frequently tested in the California bar exam, particularly under criminal law and procedure essays.