In 2015, the defendant’s
girlfriend died by suffocation after a severe beating. The defendant was charged with first-degree
premeditated murder and first-degree felony murder, with the predicate felony
being torture, which was not separately charged. At trial, the jury acquitted the defendant of
first-degree murder and the lesser offense of second-degree murder. The jury was unable to reach a verdict on the
felony-murder charge and the trial court declared a mistrial. The prosecutor again charged the defendant
with felony murder, and the defendant pleaded guilty to second-degree
murder. But the defendant filed a motion
to withdraw his plea, vacate his conviction, and dismiss the charge against him
on double jeopardy grounds. The trial
court granted the motion, the Court of Appeals affirmed in an unpublished
opinion, the Supreme Court denied leave to appeal, and the United States
Supreme Court denied certiorari. The
prosecutor then charged the defendant with torture, and the defendant again
moved to dismiss, arguing that the charge constituted a double jeopardy
violation and a vindictive prosecution. The
trial court denied the motion. In a split unpublished opinion, the Court of
Appeals majority held that the torture charge was barred by the issue-preclusion
aspect of double jeopardy. The Supreme
Court has ordered oral argument on the prosecutor’s application to address
whether the Court of Appeals erred when it concluded that the jury in the
defendant’s first trial, when it acquitted him of first- and second-degree
murder, necessarily decided an issue of ultimate fact such that the
issue-preclusion aspect of the Double Jeopardy Clause bars prosecution for the
crime of torture arising out of the same criminal incident.