WASHINGTON, Dec. 1 (UPI) -- The U.S. Supreme Court heard argument Wednesday on whether a judge can rule a defendant is innocent, then revoke that finding later in the trial.
At issue in the Boston-area case is whether the revocation violates double jeopardy, putting a defendant in jeopardy twice for the same offense.
Melvin Smith was accused of assault with intent to commit murder and unlawful possession of a firearm, among other things, in 1996. He was charged, along with his girlfriend, of shooting the girlfriend's cousin.
At trial, the defense argued that no evidence was presented showing the firearm was illegal. The judge agreed, acquitted him of that charge and the trial continued on the other charges.
But later the judge changed her mind and presented the charge to the jury, and Smith was convicted on all counts.
The victim later died, and a murder charge is pending against Smith.
But he contends the firearms conviction violated the constitutional ban on double jeopardy.
The justices should rule in the next couple of months.
