Depends on the jurisdiction and whether "double jeopardy" is allowed.
The sides in a civil trial are the same as a criminal trial. There is a plaintiff and a defendant. In a criminal trial the plaintiff is usually the jurisdictioni charging the defendant.
Double jeopardy attaches in a jury trial when a defendant is acquitted, meaning they cannot be tried again for the same crime.
yes that is called double jeopardy. The same clause is very specific though. for instance if i kill somone named doug and get away with it i cannot go and kill bob and not be tried using the reason that i was once previously on trial for a charge of murder.
The defendant is remanded to jail to await trial.
This concept is known as double jeopardy, which protects individuals from being tried for the same offense after they have been acquitted or convicted. It is a principle enshrined in the Fifth Amendment of the United States Constitution and ensures that a defendant cannot be subjected to multiple trials for the same crime.
A co-defendant is a person who is charged alongside another individual in a criminal case and is facing similar accusations or charges. Both co-defendants are prosecuted together in the same trial.
Although grand juries and trial juries are both made up of average people who were called for jury duty, they serve entirely different purposes. A grand jury helps determine whether charges should be brought against a suspect, while a trial jury renders a verdict at the criminal trial itself. Put differently, a grand jury hands down an indictment at the beginning of a case, while a trial jury decides guilt or innocence at the very end (not counting the appeal process).
Unless there is a mistrial or a new trial is ordered after a conviction is appealed, there is only one trial per defendant per set of charges. An acquittal (finding of "not guilty") cannot be appealed. This is the same whether the trial is heard by a judge (a bench trial) or a jury.
Double jeopardy applies to criminal cases and prevents a defendant from being tried twice for the same offense. It does not apply to civil lawsuits, so a defendant could potentially be held liable for damages in a civil case even if they were previously acquitted of the same offense in a criminal trial.
The Grand Jury is of the opinion, sufficient evidence was present during the grand jury testimony to proceed with a trial of the defendant. This is known as indictment.
Since it is unlikely that the defendant would appeal a not guilty verdict, it can be safely assumed that was the defendant who appealed their case after receiving a guilty verdict at their original trial. Taking a case to the court of appeals is NOT deemed to be exposing yourself to double jeapordy - only that you are hoping to get 'a second bite at the apple' in the hopes of having the first decision reversed.It would only be double jeapordy if the defendant was found NOT guilty and, without going through the appeals process, the state re-filed the exact same charges for the exact same offense, in an attempt to have another chance at proving him guilty.
If the evidence is relevant in another trial, it can be used. The issue may be whether there should be a second trial at all. If it is a second trial with the same defendant there are issues of double jeopardy. If it is a second trial with a different defendant then the question arises whether the evidence is relevant. There can also be a civil trial following a criminal trial, in which case again the question is one of relevance. The most famous civil trial following a criminal trial is the OJ Simpson situation, and much evidence from the criminal trial was relevant to the civil lawsuit. See related links below.