Criminal Defense Los Angeles: Penal Code 654 and the prohibition against double jeopardy (Kellet)
Often a situation arises when a driver is pulled over and is cited or arrested for a crime. Later, law enforcement realized that the driver was guilty of another crime. At that point, law enforcement will attempt to make sure that all crimes the driver (defendant) is guilty of are on the same complaint. Sometimes, by the time the prosecution realizes that the defendant is guilty of additional crimes, he or she has already pleaded guilty to that first charged crime. In an event like that, the prosecution should be prohibited because of a due process violation. The Supreme Court in People v. Kellett ruled just the same barring prosecution for a “felon in possession of a gun” after Elmer Kellett pleaded guilty to brandishing the same gun. (People v. Kellett (1966) 63 Cal. 2d 822. The challenge is to convince the prosecution or the court that both crimes are “closely related”. The prosecution can also be barred when the prosecution was or should have been aware of all crimes committed and decided to charge only some (or one). This later statement is based directly on Kellett. Here is the quote
When, as here, the prosecution is or should be aware of more than one offense in which the same act or course of conduct plays a significant part, all such offenses must be prosecuted in a single proceeding unless joinder is prohibited or severance permitted for good cause. Failure to unite all such offenses will result in a bar to subsequent prosecution of any offense omitted if the initial proceedings culminate in either acquittal or conviction and sentence
Case in Point: I had a client who pleaded to a DUI in Los Angeles Superior Court and in a few weeks he received a letter advising him that he was being charged with a hit and run. The hit and run occurred on the same occasion as a DUI and the prosecution agreed to dismiss it based on Kellett. California Penal Code section 654 and the prohibition against double jeopardy prohibit such prosecutions.
However, in 2018 the Court of Appeal in People v. Hendrix (20 Cal.App.5th 457) did not find a violation of “double jeopardy” or a violation of Penal Code section 654 when it held that an earlier plea for failing to stop at the red light did not prevent prosecution for a DUI when the DUI was discovered after the police officer pulled over the defendant for same red light violation. The court believed that the conduct is sufficiently different between Kellet (brandishing a firearm by an ex-felon) and Hendrix (DUI driving through a red light).
Our criminal defense practice is focused on the defense of DUIs and any other criminal law violations. For free consultation about your criminal case in Los Angeles, please call Criminal Defense Attorney Los Angles or DUI Attorney Los Angeles.
If you find yourself in a similar position, please call our office to talk to a drunk driving attorney in Los Angeles directly at (818) 921 7744 for a free case review.
(No Ratings Yet)
Loading...