Federal habeas intervention is justified where potential state prosecution runs afoul of Double Jeopardy Clause

HABEAS Walck v. Edmondson, No. 05-6273, ___ F.3d ___ (10th Cir. Jan. 4, 2007)(W.D. Oklahoma). State appeal of federal district court’s judgment granting petitioner’s request for habeas corpus relief under 28 U.S.C. § 2241 HELD: (1) Threatened state prosecution in violation of Double Jeopardy Clause is circumstance warranting federal habeas intervention. Abstention under Younger abstention doctrine is unwarranted where criminal accused presents colorable claim that forthcoming second state trial will constitute violation of double jeopardy rights. (2) De novo standard of review applies to merits of petitioner’s habeas claim despite fact that merits had already been adjudicated by Oklahoma trial court and Oklahoma Court of Criminal appeals. Deferential standard of review required by 28 U.S.C. § 2254 only applies to challenges to judgment of conviction and sentence. In this instance petitioner challenged pending re-trial, not any previous conviction or sentence. Therefore, non-deferential de novo standard provided under general habeas provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 2241 applies. Read the opinion here.