TRAVIS SOTO v. BRIAN SIEFKER, Putnam County Sheriff - Articles

All Content

TRAVIS SOTO v. BRIAN SIEFKER, Putnam County Sheriff

Posted by: Karen Belcher on Aug 21, 2023

Court: 6th Circuit Court (Published Opinions)

Attorneys 1: ARGUED: Sean A. Mirski, ARNOLD & PORTER KAYE SCHOLER LLP, Washington, D.C., for Appellant.

Attorneys 2: ARGUED: Michael J. Hendershot, OFFICE OF THE OHIO ATTORNEY GENERAL, Columbus, Ohio, for Appellee.

Attorneys 3: ON BRIEF: Sean A. Mirski, R. Stanton Jones, Andrew T. Tutt, ARNOLD & PORTER KAYE SCHOLER LLP, Washington, D.C., Richard Kerger, THE KERGER LAW FIRM, LLC, Toledo, Ohio, Randall L. Porter, OFFICE OF THE OHIO PUBLIC DEFENDER, Columbus, Ohio, for Appellant.

Attorneys 4: ON BRIEF: Michael J. Hendershot, Benjamin M. Flowers, Jana M. Bosch, Brenda S. Leikala, OFFICE OF THE OHIO ATTORNEY GENERAL, Columbus, Ohio, Gary L. Lammers, PUTNAM COUNTY PROSECUTOR’S OFFICE, Ottawa, Ohio, for Appellee.

Attorneys 5: ON BRIEF: Derek C. Reinbold, KELLOGG, HANSEN, TODD, FIGEL & FREDERICK, P.L.L.C., Washington, D.C., Stephanie Franxman Kessler, PINALES, STACHLER, YOUNG & BURRELL CO., L.P.A., Cincinnati, Ohio, for Amicus Curiae.

Judge(s): GRIFFIN, KETHLEDGE, and THAPAR, Circuit Judges

Court Appealed: United States District Court for the Northern District of Ohio at Toledo

KETHLEDGE, Circuit Judge. Jeopardy attaches to an “offence,” for purposes of the Double Jeopardy Clause, only when a court or jury has power to determine the defendant’s guilt or innocence as to that “offence.” Here, an Ohio trial court dismissed a manslaughter charge against Travis Soto, pursuant to his agreement to plead guilty to another charge. Ten years later, in connection with the same incident, the State charged Soto with murder. We agree with the Ohio Supreme Court and the district court that the Double Jeopardy Clause does not bar that prosecution.

Attachments: