Guam § 1 - Double Jeopardy. Different Offense.

§ 1. Double Jeopardy. Different Offense.

A prosecution of a defendant for a violation of a different provision of the statutes or based on different

facts than a former prosecution is barred by such former prosecution under the following circumstances:

(a) The former prosecution resulted in an acquittal or in a conviction as defined in § 1.24 and the

subsequent prosecution is for:

(1) any offense of which the defendant could have been convicted on the first prosecution;

(2) any offense of which the defendant should have been tried on the first prosecution under

Subsection (b) of § 65.30 of the Criminal Procedure Code unless the court ordered a separate trial

of the charge of such offense; or

(3) the same conduct, unless (A) the offense of which the defendant was formerly convicted

or acquitted and the offense for which he is subsequently prosecuted each requires proof of a fact

not required by the other and the law defining each of such offenses is intended to prevent a

substantially different harm or evil, or (B) the second offense was not consummated when the

former trial began.

(b) The former prosecution was terminated, after the complaint was filed or the indictment found,

by an acquittal or by a final order or judgment for the defendant which has not been set aside, reversed

or vacated and which acquittal, final order or judgment necessarily required a determination

inconsistent with a fact which must be established for conviction of the second offense.

(c) The former prosecution was improperly terminated, as improper termination is defined in §

1.24, and the subsequent prosecution is for an offense of which the defendant could have been

convicted had the former prosecution not been improperly terminated.