People v. Cordero
2012 IL App (2d) 101113
Ill. App. Ct.2012Background
- defendant Sergio Cordero was convicted after a bench trial of aggravated criminal sexual assault; the trial court denied acquittal but granted a new trial for reversible error due to exclusion of certain evidence; after the new-trial order, defendant moved to dismiss the charge arguing double jeopardy because the first-trial evidence was legally insufficient; the circuit court denied the motion; on appeal, the State argues retrial is permissible because original jeopardy had not terminated; the appellate court agrees and affirms the order allowing retrial regardless of first-trial sufficiency; the opinion discusses Richardson and related cases to support the continuing-jeopardy doctrine.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether double jeopardy bars retrial after conviction when the first trial was reversible-error granted a new trial. | People contends jeopardy did not terminate; retrial permissible. | Cordero argues retrial constitutes double jeopardy due to insufficiency. | No; jeopardy did not terminate, so retrial allowed. |
| Does Richardson govern whether jeopardy terminates only upon acquittal or also upon other events like mistrial or reversal? | People relies on Richardson to limit retrial. | Cordero relies on continuing-jeopardy principle. | Richardson supports continuing jeopardy; retrial not barred. |
| Is double jeopardy triggered by sufficiency of the first trial’s evidence? | People would be barred if evidence was insufficient. | Cordero argues insufficiency prevents retrial. | Sufficiency of first trial is not controlling; retrial allowed. |
Key Cases Cited
- United States v. Richardson, 468 U.S. 317 (1984) (termination of jeopardy requires more than mistrial; retrial permitted regardless of first-trial sufficiency)
- People v. Placek, 184 Ill. 2d 370 (1998) (double jeopardy requires an event terminating jeopardy; limits on retrial when jeopardy terminated)
- People v. Hobbs, 301 Ill. App. 3d 581 (1998) (sufficiency of evidence not properly before appellate review when jeopardy not terminated)
- People v. Smith, 338 Ill. App. 3d 254 (2003) (if original jeopardy not terminated, double jeopardy does not bar retrial; evidentiary sufficiency not reviewable)
- United States v. Wood, 958 F.2d 963 (1992) (continuing jeopardy when new trial granted after trial error; retrial permissible regardless of first-trial sufficiency)