Appellate courts should be able to re-weigh evidence when reviewing double-jeopardy decisions in cases stemming from mistrials due to prosecutorial misconduct, defense attorneys argued before the Pennsylvania Supreme Court, in a session that drew a testy exchange between one justice and a deputy attorney general.

The Supreme Court heard argument Wednesday in the consolidated cases, captioned Commonwealth v. Rivera and Commonwealth v. Cooper-Reid, to determine what standard appellate courts should apply when reviewing double-jeopardy claims that arise after a case is tossed for prosecutorial misconduct.

This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.

To view this content, please continue to their sites.

Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now

Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now

Why am I seeing this?

LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law are third party online distributors of the broad collection of current and archived versions of ALM's legal news publications. LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law customers are able to access and use ALM's content, including content from the National Law Journal, The American Lawyer, Legaltech News, The New York Law Journal, and Corporate Counsel, as well as other sources of legal information.

For questions call 1-877-256-2472 or contact us at [email protected]