NewsHour: Supreme Court on Double Jeopardy - June 24, 1996

The Supreme Court ruled today in two cases involving double jeopardy and the way this country has fought the drug problem. One case was from Michigan and the other from California. To look into these decisions we talk with Stuart Taylor of the "American Lawyer" magazine, following a report on the California case by Jeffrey Kaye of KCET-Los Angeles.
June 24, 1996

CHARLES ARLT, Defendant: They took everything we had. We didn't hide a dime, every transaction was done by the law.

JAMES WREN, Defendant: The government took vehicles, automobiles, and they took aircraft, they took--

MR. KAYE: After the men were indicted on criminal charges, the government filed a civil forfeiture suit in order to confiscate their property. Wren's lawyer, Shawn Perez, says the government punished the men twice for the same crime. That was double jeopardy, says Perez, a violation of the Constitution's Fifth Amendment. The Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals agreed.

SHAWN PEREZ, Lawyer: I see nothing wrong with punishing a person once, and the Constitution says, yes, we can punish you once, but we cannot punish you twice for the same offense in two separate proceedings. Arlt and Wren were punished twice by the forfeiture of their property. After they had already been prosecuted and convicted and sentenced to life imprisonment, the government came back and said, we're taking everything you own--resulted in a second punishment.

Continue