Facts of the Case

Provided by Oyez

Standard Oil Co. and two employees, Fong Foo and Robert Knupp were tried for conspiracy and concealing material facts within the jurisdiction of a governmental agency. The group allegedly falsified tests on goods manufactured at Standard Oil’s plant. Before the government finished presenting their case, the district court judge directed the jury to return verdicts of acquittal for all parties on all counts. He then entered formal judgments of acquittal on the grounds of improper conduct by the Assistant U.S. States Attorney and a lack of credibility in the testimony of government witnesses. The United States filed for a writ of mandamus from the U.S. Court of Appeals for the First Circuit, asking the court of vacate the judgments and order a new trial. The court granted the writ, holding that the district court did not have the power to direct the judgment of acquittal.

Questions

  1. (1) Did the district court judge have the power to order acquittal before the prosecution rested its case?

    (2) Does the double jeopardy clause of the Fifth Amendment protect the petitioners from a second trial?

Conclusions

  1. Yes, Yes. In a per curiam opinion, the Supreme Court reversed the court of appeals. The Court held that vacating the acquittal and granting a new trial violated petitioners’ constitutional protection against double jeopardy. Justice John M. Harlan concurred, agreeing that double jeopardy barred a second trial, because the trial court did not base its decision solely on the Assistant U.S. Attorney’s misconduct. Justice Tom C. Clark dissented, arguing that the district court had no power to direct a verdict of acquittal. Justice Charles E. Whittaker did not participate