Price v. Vincent
At the close of the prosecutions case in his trial for first-degree murder, Jones moved for a directed verdict on the grounds of insufficient evidence of premeditation and deliberation. The trial judge apparently granted the motion, but then submitted the first-degree charge to the jury. After the conviction was upheld on direct appeal, Jones sought federal habeas corpus relief. The district court granted the petition on the grounds that continuation of the trial violated the double jeopardy clause of the U.S. Constitution. The court of appeals affirmed, holding that: (1) whether the state trial judge acquitted defendant of first-degree murder was a question of law; (2) the state trial court granted a motion for directed verdict on the charge of first-degree murder; and (3) granting of motion for directed verdict constituted a grant of acquittal such that jeopardy attached.
Questions Presented:
1. Whether the Michigan Supreme Court's conclusion that the trial court did not direct a verdict of acquittal is a factual finding entitled to deference on habeas corpus review.
2. Whether defendant Vincent was twice placed in jeopardy by the action of the trial court in first granting a motion for directed verdict on the issue of first degree murder, and shortly
thereafter withdrawing its grant, where both the initial decision and its recall occurred out of the presence of the jury.
