Double jeopardy and alternative verdicts
360.3B Double jeopardy and alternative verdicts
Double jeopardy
A person who has been convicted or acquitted of an aggravated offence may not be convicted of a basic offence relating to the aggravated offence that is alleged to have been committed in the period during which the person was alleged to have committed the aggravated offence.
However, subsection (1) does not prevent an alternative verdict under subsection (4).
A person who has been convicted or acquitted of a basic offence relating to an aggravated offence may not be convicted of the aggravated offence if any of the occasions relied on as evidence of the commission of the aggravated offence includes the conduct that constituted the basic offence.
Alternative verdict—aggravated offence not proven
If, on a trial for an aggravated offence, the trier of fact:
is not satisfied that the defendant is guilty of the aggravated offence; but
is satisfied beyond reasonable doubt that he or she is guilty of the basic offence relating to the aggravated offence;
it may find the defendant not guilty of the aggravated offence but guilty of the basic offence, so long as the defendant has been accorded procedural fairness in relation to that finding of guilt.
Definitions
In this section:
aggravated offence means an offence against subsection 360.2(2) or 360.3(1A).
basic offence relating to an aggravated offence means:
if the aggravated offence is an offence against subsection 360.2(2)—an offence against subsection 360.2(1); or
if the aggravated offence is an offence against subsection 360.3(1A)—an offence against subsection 360.3(1).
The statute text is free to read above. View subscription options to unlock the case-law research tools for each provision.