NEWPORT BEACH, Calif. — A judge at the Newport Beach Harbor Justice Center on Tuesday rejected a motion to dismiss felony theft charges after the public defender argued the prosecution violated constitutional protections against double jeopardy.
Judge Antony C. Ufland denied the request, ruling the objection had not been properly raised and did not apply under the facts presented during the pretrial hearing.
The hearing addressed the accused’s prior felony charges as a co-defendant for Count One, organized retail theft, and Count Two, grand theft. Count One alleged two or more thefts exceeding $950 in concert with one or more persons on June 5, 2020, to which he pleaded not guilty on March 22, 2024. That same day, he pleaded not guilty to Count Two, grand theft, allegedly committed a week later on June 12.
Public Defender Blake Ducker argued on behalf of the accused, who appeared out of custody. He said the accused had already faced trial at a separate courthouse and asked that the case be dismissed to avoid double prosecution.
The public defender asserted the accused’s right to protection under the Double Jeopardy Clause of the Fifth Amendment and argued that denying the motion would violate that constitutional safeguard.
According to Congress, the Double Jeopardy Clause is part of the U.S. Constitution under the Fifth Amendment. It states that persons should not “be subject for the same offense to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb.”
The legal principle of double jeopardy prohibits courts from punishing an individual multiple times for the same offense and seeks to prevent repeated prosecutions that impose emotional and financial burdens.
The Fifth Amendment also protects the right to a grand jury, the right against self-incrimination, protection against double jeopardy, compensation for property taken under eminent domain, and the right to due process.
Judge Ufland overruled the objection based on the facts of the case. He described three protections that can prevent repeated prosecution for the same offense: the federal Double Jeopardy Clause under the Fifth Amendment, the state double jeopardy clause under the California Constitution, and the Kellett rule.
The judge noted that the Double Jeopardy Clause applies to both federal and state governments, while California’s constitutional protections are sometimes interpreted more broadly. Under the Kellett rule, related prosecutions arising from the same offense generally must proceed in one courthouse under one case and may not be split into multiple cases within the same jurisdiction.
However, Judge Ufland said prosecution in one jurisdiction does not always bar prosecution in another for the same act, making double jeopardy protections conditional in some circumstances.
He added that in California, murders, kidnappings and sexual assault cases may be prosecuted in multiple courtrooms and across jurisdictions without violating the Double Jeopardy Clause.
The judge and Deputy District Attorney Tanner Ward acknowledged that the Double Jeopardy Clause applied only to the co-defendant, who had been prosecuted in Washington state in federal court.
They said the decision not to transport the co-defendant to California for trial reflected a determination that the punishment imposed in that case was sufficient and did not need to be revisited.
Judge Ufland said he understood that the earlier release of the co-defendant was an influential factor in the accused’s request for similar relief.
The accused was advised that he could continue challenging the matter through an appellate court.
The court stated it would deny the objection in light of the scale and context of the alleged crime, finding it had no statutory authority to grant the request.
The judge also commented that he was aware the accused had served in the military and said that would be considered during the preliminary hearing.
A preliminary hearing was set for July 13 after the court overruled the objection, concluding it lacked legal justification to dismiss the case.
Follow the Vanguard on Social Media – X, Instagram and Facebook. Subscribe the Vanguard News letters. To make a tax-deductible donation, please visit davisvanguard.org/donate or give directly through ActBlue. Your support will ensure that the vital work of the Vanguard continues.
