Prosecución de homicidio vehicular y juicios previos en Georgia

Explicación Simple

Si alguien es acusado de matar a alguien en un accidente de coche, puede ser juzgado varias veces si las acusaciones anteriores no fueron correctas. Esto significa que aunque un juicio no funcione, el estado puede intentar de nuevo con una nueva acusación.

Es como si un jugador de fútbol fallara un penalti, pero en lugar de rendirse, el equipo vuelve a intentar el tiro hasta marcar un gol.

Ejemplo Práctico

Imagina que Pedro tuvo un accidente de coche que causó la muerte de alguien. La policía lo acusa, pero la acusación se anula porque cometieron un error. Luego, la fiscalía presenta nuevamente los cargos y Pedro puede ser juzgado de nuevo por ese mismo accidente.

Texto Original del Estatuto (Inglés)

fendant was indicted for vehicular homicide for the third time following the quashing of two prior indictments which cited the wrong code subsection, the appellate court upheld application of O.C.G.A. § 17-7-53.1 , holding that whether the prior indictments were sufficient to withstand demurrer was irrelevant. State v. Dorsey, 251 Ga. App. 788 , 555 S.E.2d 141 (2001). Nolle prossed entries. - Fact that state entered a nolle prosequi as to the second indictment did not preclude prosecution of the defendant under a third indictment for the same offense; the bar under O.C.G.A. § 17-7-53.1 follows actions adverse to the state putting it out of court. Redding v. State, 205 Ga. App. 613 , 423 S.E.2d 10 , cert. denied, 205 Ga. App. 901 , 423 S.E.2d 10 (1992); Gourley v. State, 268 Ga. 235 , 486 S.E.2d 342 (1997). When a trial court entered an order of nolle prosequi on a first indictment after a second indictment had been filed, the court's granting of the defendant's general demurrer on the second indictment was the only action which fell within the dictates of O.C.G.A. § 17-7-53.1 , and the trial court correctly held that there was no statutory bar to the defendant's prosecution under a third indictment. Gamble v. State, 235 Ga. App. 777 , 510 S.E.2d 69 (1998). Since the first indictment against the defendant was quashed and the state later initiated a nolle prosequi order regarding a second indictment, which the trial court properly granted in the court's discretion, the entry of