Constitutional Law

Charges against X-Caliber Guns dismissed

This is a strange case. The Arizona Attorney General (not ATF) brought State charges against a Phoenix-area gun dealer, claiming he'd supplied over 700 guns to Mexican drug cartels.

And the AG loses on a directed verdict -- meaning the judge finds that the evidence is nonexistent: no rational juror could find for the prosecution.

And then the AG's office says it will appeal. ???? Ever hear of double jeopardy? He was on trial, jeopardy clearly attached by any standard (I forget the AZ rule, but jeopardy usually attaches when the jury is empanelled or when the first witness begins testimony, and a motion for DV is made when the prosecution finishes its case, much later), and he can't be retried.

UPDATE: here's the ruling, in pdf. The State charges were under the "scheme or artifice" statute, and the court says that materiality is a requirement there (in the typical case, that it was something where if the person knew the truth they'd not buy, or otherwise would act differently), and the court notes that the prosecution was unable to prove a single gun wound up in the hands of someone who couldn't legally possess it. Sounds like a pretty big gap between press reports and the evidence.
Hat tip to Practical Tactical....

Full post as published by Of Arms and the Law on March 19, 2009 (boomark / email).