Double Jeopardy: Rodney King Cases Discussion Essay

Exclusively available on IvyPanda Available only on IvyPanda

The concept of double jeopardy is a crucial part of the US constitution. The Double Jeopardy clause, stated in the Fifth Amendment, was designed to protect the criminals from prosecution for the same offense twice (Little, 2019). According to the legislation, no individual can be charged for the committed crime if a trial has already been conducted. The doctrine was included in the US Constitution to limit the power of the legal institutions and demonstrate the justice of governmental decisions, upholding the Due Process and Equal Protection Clauses of the Fourteenth Amendment (Little, 2019). However, some exceptions to the double jeopardy regulation are still present, namely the cases of Rodney King, where four suspects were tried twice for the same offense.

We will write a custom essay on your topic a custom Essay on Double Jeopardy: Rodney King Cases Discussion
808 writers online

During the first trial, the beating of an African-American man, Rodney King, was investigated in the Los Angeles County District Court, with four police officers charged with assault and use of excessive force. Although videotape evidence was presented, the offenders were acquitted, causing public outrage in the form of the Los Angeles riots (Kappeler & Schaefer, 2018). A number of police and law representatives considered the verdict unjust according to the relevant US laws, necessitating a change in the decision. Therefore, in avoidance of the double jeopardy clause, the officers were prosecuted for the violations regarding Rodney King’s civil rights in the second case.

Given that the suspects were charged with similar crimes based on the same incident, it is possible to argue that the double jeopardy regulation was violated. Although the charges introduced for the second trial included different legal grounds, the same event and evidence were used for the prosecution process, meaning that the officers encountered two separate legal proceedings for one crime (Kappeler & Schaefer, 2018). Therefore, the double jeopardy clause of the Fifth Amendment was transgressed.

References

Kappeler, V. E., & Schaefer, B. P. (2018). The police and society: Touchstone readings, fourth edition. Waveland Press.

Little R.K. (2020) Gamble v. U.S. on double jeopardy. In D. Klein & M. Marietta (Eds.), SCOTUS 2019 (pp. 49-58). Macmillan.

Print
Need an custom research paper on Double Jeopardy: Rodney King Cases Discussion written from scratch by a professional specifically for you?
808 writers online
Cite This paper
Select a referencing style:

Reference

IvyPanda. (2022, October 26). Double Jeopardy: Rodney King Cases Discussion. https://ivypanda.com/essays/double-jeopardy-rodney-king-cases-discussion/

Work Cited

"Double Jeopardy: Rodney King Cases Discussion." IvyPanda, 26 Oct. 2022, ivypanda.com/essays/double-jeopardy-rodney-king-cases-discussion/.

References

IvyPanda. (2022) 'Double Jeopardy: Rodney King Cases Discussion'. 26 October.

References

IvyPanda. 2022. "Double Jeopardy: Rodney King Cases Discussion." October 26, 2022. https://ivypanda.com/essays/double-jeopardy-rodney-king-cases-discussion/.

1. IvyPanda. "Double Jeopardy: Rodney King Cases Discussion." October 26, 2022. https://ivypanda.com/essays/double-jeopardy-rodney-king-cases-discussion/.


Bibliography


IvyPanda. "Double Jeopardy: Rodney King Cases Discussion." October 26, 2022. https://ivypanda.com/essays/double-jeopardy-rodney-king-cases-discussion/.

Powered by CiteTotal, best bibliography generator
If you are the copyright owner of this paper and no longer wish to have your work published on IvyPanda. Request the removal
More related papers
Cite
Print
1 / 1