Abstract
This article argues that the Supreme Court of Ohio's decision in Lovejoy helps to preserve the purpose of our criminal laws, which is to protect society. The article starts by recapping the events leading up to trial, then it breaks down the court decisions on appeal. The analysis of these decisions arrives at the conclusion that allowing a defendant to be retried on charges in which the accused was not previously acquitted, but rather the jury was hung or there was a mistrial, does not frustrate justice but instead greatly increases the opportunities for justice. In addition, the accused is not placed in jeopardy twice because jeopardy was never terminated in the first trial since there is no final decision with a hung jury or a mistrial. Consequently, allowing a defendant to be retried when a final decision has not been reached will help maintain a safer society for all of us.
Recommended Citation
Note, State v. Lovejoy: Hung Juries and Retrial vs. Double Jeopardy and Collateral Estoppel, 46 Clev. St. L. Rev. 197 (1998)