The following excerpt is from U.S. v. Giovanelli, 945 F.2d 479 (2nd Cir. 1991):
Of course, that holding, addressed as it was to successive prosecutions by the same sovereign, is of minimal significance in the present case. As explained above, under the dual sovereignty doctrine a federal indictment charging conduct that was previously the subject of a state prosecution simply does not implicate the double jeopardy clause. "[N]othing prevents a federal prosecution whenever the state proceeding has not adequately protected the federal interest." United States v. Davis, 906 F.2d at 832. Hence, the defendants are in error when they assert that, since the government failed to establish that they engaged in racketeering activity after the conclusion of the state trials, their convictions violate the Fifth Amendment's double jeopardy clause. Indeed, acceptance of the defendants' argument would result in an evisceration of the dual sovereignty doctrine.
Page 493
4. Playing Tape on Rebuttal Summation
The above passage should not be considered legal advice. Reliable answers to complex legal questions require comprehensive research memos. To learn more visit www.alexi.com.