Murder retrials after jury votes
Blueford v. Arkansas
In brief
Blueford lost his challenge: double jeopardy does not bar Arkansas from retrying him on the two murder charges.
- Where it stands
- Decided
Decided 6-3 · May 24, 2012 · Opinion by Chief Justice Roberts
- What it’s about
- After the jury deadlocked, Alex Blueford argued that its forewoman’s announced unanimous votes against capital and first-degree murder were acquittals that barred a retrial.
- Who it affects
- The ruling means the Double Jeopardy Clause does not prevent Arkansas from retrying Blueford on those two charges.
Summary: written with AI from the case record.
What it's about
The Supreme Court ruled that double jeopardy did not bar Arkansas from retrying him on those charges and agreed with the Arkansas Supreme Court (affirmed its ruling).
During deliberations, the jury forewoman announced that jurors were unanimous against convicting Blueford of capital and first-degree murder. The jury later deadlocked, and the judge declared a mistrial.
The dispute turned on whether the forewoman's statements counted as final decisions clearing Blueford of two charges, even though the judge declared a mistrial.
Question presented
1. Did the jury forewoman's announcements of unanimous votes on capital and first-degree murder constitute acquittals under the Fifth Amendment's Double Jeopardy Clause, prohibiting Arkansas from retrying Blueford on those charges? 2. Was there was a manifest necessity to declare a mistrial on charges of capital and first-degree murder?
What the Court decided
Holding
The Double Jeopardy Clause does not bar retrying Blueford on charges of capital murder and first-degree murder. Pp. 5 − 10. 2011 Ark. 8, ___ S. W. 3d ___, affirmed.
- Result
- Affirmed
The vote
From the opinions
“Today’s decision misapplies these longstanding principles.”
What's next
Arkansas may pursue a retrial on those charges; the ruling itself does not say whether or when that will happen.
Documents
Opinions
Audio
Docket activity
New analysis added
AI analysis generated: Case Briefing
New analysis added
AI analysis generated: Impact Analysis
AI analysis generated: Opinion Summary
Show 5 moreShow fewer
AI analysis generated: Decision Record
Case data updated: summary, question_presented, generation_metadata
Case data updated: question_presented, extraction_metadata
Audio Recording added: Oral Arguments - Blueford
Opinion added: Blueford
More questions
- What did Blueford argue?
- He argued that the forewoman's announcements meant the jury had cleared him of capital and first-degree murder, so Arkansas could not try him again on those charges.
- Why did Justice Sotomayor disagree?
- She said the forewoman's announcement that the jury was unanimous against the charges counted as an acquittal, which would bar a second trial.
Sources
Primary materials plus reporting. Best-effort analysis: this explainer relies on a mix of primary materials and trusted secondary sources. Official filings and opinions remain authoritative.