Supreme Court of the United States

United States v. Felix

March 25, 1992503 U.S. 378

Summary

The Court held that double jeopardy did not bar Felix's Oklahoma prosecution. Introducing evidence of Oklahoma drug offenses under Rule 404(b) at his earlier Missouri trial did not constitute prosecution for those offenses, and a conspiracy remains a separate offense from its substantive objects even when previously prosecuted conduct supplies overt acts. Chief Justice Rehnquist wrote for the Court, with seven Justices joining the entire opinion and Justices Stevens and Blackmun joining Parts I and II. Stevens, joined by Blackmun, concurred in part and in the judgment, concluding that the conspiracy prosecution was permissible under Grady itself because the previously prosecuted acts did not establish an essential element of the conspiracy.

Holding

  • Whether prior admission of evidence of the Oklahoma drug transactions barred prosecution for those transactions.. The Double Jeopardy Clause did not bar the Oklahoma substantive drug charges merely because evidence supporting them had been introduced at the Missouri trial under Rule 404(b).
  • Whether the conspiracy prosecution was barred because some alleged overt acts constituted a previously prosecuted substantive offense.. The conspiracy prosecution was not barred because conspiracy and the substantive crime are separate offenses for double jeopardy purposes.

Docket 90-1599

Cited authorities

  • Rule 404(b)
  • Rule 404(b)
  • Rule 404(b)
  • Rule 404(b)
  • Rule 404(b)
  • Rule 404(b)
  • Rule 404(b)
  • CA10

Cited by

Read full opinionPDF