Russell Grimes, Appellant v. State of Delaware, Appellee.

Summary

The court held that the Double Jeopardy Clause did not prevent the State from retrying Grimes for first-degree robbery after his conviction was vacated, even though the jury had acquitted him of a lesser-included offense in the same trial. The retrial remained part of the same continuing prosecution, and the inconsistent verdicts could not support issue preclusion because it was impossible to determine which verdict reflected the jury's rational judgment. The court affirmed the robbery conviction and rejected the derivative challenge to the companion firearms conviction.