People v. Eroshevich, 179 Cal. Rptr. 3d 356

People charged Stern in 11 counts, with two conspiracy convictions related to obtaining controlled substances by fraud and giving a false name on prescriptions; other counts were acquitted.
Stern moved for a new trial under Penal Code section 1181 and the court dismissed the conspiracy counts under section 1385, concluding the evidence was legally insufficient to show intent to commit the target crimes.
Court of Appeal reversed the dismissal of the conspiracy counts, reinstating the jury verdict, and held retrial was barred by double jeopardy on remand.
The People petitioned for review, contending double jeopardy does not bar retrial if the trial court grants a new trial on remaining grounds.
California Supreme Court held that double jeopardy does not preclude retrial if the trial court grants a new trial or dismisses on grounds other than insufficiency of the evidence.
court distinguished prior decisions (e.g., Hatch, Rumsey, Hudson) and concluded reversal of the trial court’s insufficiency ruling allows reinstatement of the jury verdict and potential retrial on remand.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether double jeopardy bars retrial if a new trial is granted.	People argued retrial is permissible when remand follows a new-trial denial on other grounds.	Eroshevich/Stern argued retrial is barred because the trial court’s insufficiency ruling equates to an acquittal.	No bar to retrial; retrial allowed if new trial granted on remaining grounds.

Hudson v. Louisiana, 450 U.S. 40 (U.S. Supreme Court 1981) (double jeopardy bars retrial after a conviction reversal or acquittal-equivalent ruling)
Burks v. United States, 437 U.S. 1 (U.S. Supreme Court 1978) (insufficient-evidence reversal bars retrial)
Evans v. Michigan, 568 U.S. _ (U.S. Supreme Court 2013) (acquittal-equivalent trial court rulings and remand considerations)
Tibbs v. Florida, 457 U.S. 31 (U.S. Supreme Court 1982) (retrial after weight-of-the-evidence reversal not barred)
Sanabria v. United States, 437 U.S. 54 (U.S. Supreme Court 1978) (trial court errors in judgment but not final acquittal may permit appeal)
Fong Foo v. United States, 369 U.S. 141 (U.S. Supreme Court 1962) (trial court-directed acquittals bars retrial even if erroneous)
People v. Hatch, 22 Cal.4th 260 (Cal. 2000) (pre-verdict insufficiency rulings generally not applicable to retrial after reversal)
People v. Lagunas, 8 Cal.4th 1038 (Cal. 1994) (distinguishes between 13th juror review and sufficiency rulings)