dual sovereignty doctrine in Florida

1994The Court also rejected the notion that the dual sovereignty doctrine should be replaced with a "balancing of interests" approach in which only one state would vindicate the wrong: To deny a State its power to enforce its criminal laws because another State has won the race to the courthouse `would be a shocking and untoward deprivation of the historic right and obligation of the States to maintain peace and order within their confines.' Bartkus [ v. Illinois ], 359 U.S. 121, at 137 , 79 S.Ct. [676], at 685 [ 3 L.Ed.2d 684 (1959)].

1994The Court also rejected the notion that the dual sovereignty doctrine should be replaced with a "balancing of interests" approach in which only one state would vindicate the wrong: To deny a State its power to enforce its criminal laws because another State has won the race to the courthouse `would be a shocking and untoward deprivation of the historic right and obligation of the States to maintain peace and order within their confines.' Bartkus [ v. Illinois ], 359 U.S. 121, at 137 , 79 S.Ct. [676], at 685 [ 3 L.Ed.2d 684 (1959)].

1981If this were a case which required affirmance based solely on a strict application of the doctrine of dual sovereignty, this Court would be inclined to follow the approach enunciated first in Commonwealth v. Mills, 447 Pa. 163 , 286 A.2d 638 (1971), and later adopted in People v. Cooper, 398 Mich. 450 , 247 N.W.2d 866 (1975).

1981If this were a case which required affirmance based solely on a strict application of the doctrine of dual sovereignty, this Court would be inclined to follow the approach enunciated first in Commonwealth v. Mills, 447 Pa. 163 , 286 A.2d 638 (1971), and later adopted in People v. Cooper, 398 Mich. 450 , 247 N.W.2d 866 (1975).

1981If this were a case which required affirmance based solely on a strict application of the doctrine of dual sovereignty, this Court would be inclined to follow the approach enunciated first in Commonwealth v. Mills, 447 Pa. 163 , 286 A.2d 638 (1971), and later adopted in People v. Cooper, 398 Mich. 450 , 247 N.W.2d 866 (1975).

1981If this were a case which required affirmance based solely on a strict application of the doctrine of dual sovereignty, this Court would be inclined to follow the approach enunciated first in Commonwealth v. Mills, 447 Pa. 163 , 286 A.2d 638 (1971), and later adopted in People v. Cooper, 398 Mich. 450 , 247 N.W.2d 866 (1975).

2015Counties, which are political subdivisions of the state, are not sovereign entities; “ ‘[rjather, they have been traditionally regarded as subordinate governmental instrumentalities created by the State to assist in the carrying out of state governmental functions.’” Id. at 392 , 90 S.Ct. 1184 (quoting Reynolds v. Sims, 877 U.S. 533 , 575, 84 S.Ct. 1362 , 12 L.Ed.2d 506 (1964)).

2015Counties, which are political subdivisions of the state, are not sovereign entities; “ ‘[rjather, they have been traditionally regarded as subordinate governmental instrumentalities created by the State to assist in the carrying out of state governmental functions.’” Id. at 392 , 90 S.Ct. 1184 (quoting Reynolds v. Sims, 877 U.S. 533 , 575, 84 S.Ct. 1362 , 12 L.Ed.2d 506 (1964)).

2007Heath v. Alabama, 474 U.S. 82 , 106 S.Ct. 433 , 88 L.Ed.2d 387 (1985). "[U]nder the doctrine of dual sovereignty, one may in fact be placed twice in jeopardy without being deprived of his constitutional protection." Hernandez v. State, 397 So.2d 715, 717 (Fla. 1st DCA 1981).

2007Heath v. Alabama, 474 U.S. 82 , 106 S.Ct. 433 , 88 L.Ed.2d 387 (1985). "[U]nder the doctrine of dual sovereignty, one may in fact be placed twice in jeopardy without being deprived of his constitutional protection." Hernandez v. State, 397 So.2d 715, 717 (Fla. 1st DCA 1981).

1983In Elkins v. United States, 364 U.S. 206 , 80 S.Ct. 1437 , 4 L.Ed.2d 1669 (1960), the Court rejected the dual sovereignty doctrine; evidence obtained by state authorities during a search, which if conducted by federal officers would have violated the fourth amendment, is also excluded at the federal level.

1983In Elkins v. United States, 364 U.S. 206 , 80 S.Ct. 1437 , 4 L.Ed.2d 1669 (1960), the Court rejected the dual sovereignty doctrine; evidence obtained by state authorities during a search, which if conducted by federal officers would have violated the fourth amendment, is also excluded at the federal level.

1983In Murphy v. Waterfront Commission of New York Harbor, 378 U.S. 52 , 84 S.Ct. 1594 , 12 L.Ed.2d 678 (1964), the Court again refused to apply the dual sovereignty doctrine, holding that a state may not constitutionally compel a witness to testify when that testimony might be used against him in a federal prosecution.

1983In Murphy v. Waterfront Commission of New York Harbor, 378 U.S. 52 , 84 S.Ct. 1594 , 12 L.Ed.2d 678 (1964), the Court again refused to apply the dual sovereignty doctrine, holding that a state may not constitutionally compel a witness to testify when that testimony might be used against him in a federal prosecution.

1981This Court is called upon by the appellant here to set aside and vitiate the doctrine of dual sovereignty by recognizing that the holding in Bartkus v. Illinois, 359 U.S. 121 , 79 S.Ct. 676 , 3 L.Ed.2d 684 (1959), has been overruled in Benton v. Maryland, 395 U.S. 784 , 89 S.Ct. 2056 , 23 L.Ed.2d 707 (1969) wherein the Fifth Amendment was applied to the states through the Fourteenth Amendment.

1981This Court is called upon by the appellant here to set aside and vitiate the doctrine of dual sovereignty by recognizing that the holding in Bartkus v. Illinois, 359 U.S. 121 , 79 S.Ct. 676 , 3 L.Ed.2d 684 (1959), has been overruled in Benton v. Maryland, 395 U.S. 784 , 89 S.Ct. 2056 , 23 L.Ed.2d 707 (1969) wherein the Fifth Amendment was applied to the states through the Fourteenth Amendment.