finding Abney "does not constitutionally mandate interlocutory appeals” and that due process does not require the State to provide an immediate appeal
How later courts described this case
- finding Abney "does not constitutionally mandate interlocutory appeals” and that due process does not require the State to provide an immediate appeal
Written by the judges who cited it.
The opinion
McAULIFFE, Judge,
concurring.
I concur in the result. I agree with the Court’s conclusion that this defendant’s right to demand a jury trial reasonably ensures appellate review of his double jeopardy *78 claim prior to trial, thus affording him the full protection of the Fifth Amendment and equal protection of the laws.
I am unwilling to join the Court’s dictum suggesting that a defendant charged in the District Court with an offense punishable by imprisonment for 90 days or less has no right to an immediate appeal of the denial of a motion to dismiss based upon double jeopardy grounds. That question should be deferred for consideration in an appropriate case.