Clarence C. Roland, III v. United States

During Petitioner’s federal trial, the government elicited evidence that he had previously been tried in state court for the same conduct, had asserted the same defenses, and had been convicted based on much of the same evidence submitted in the federal trial. The government also introduced the conviction of Petitioner’s coconspirator for engaging in the same conduct. While Gamble v. United States, 587 U.S. 678 (2019), reaffirms the separate sovereigns doctrine—allowing successive prosecutions by different sovereigns—no previous court has permitted a conviction by a jury in a separate sovereign to be used as evidence of guilt in a federal trial. Due process demands that a criminal defendant receive a fair trial free from improper outside influence. The questions presented are:

1. Whether eliciting the fact and details of a defendant’s conviction in a separate sovereign—including that it was for the same conduct and that the defendant asserted the same defenses—violates due process.

2. Whether eliciting details of a co-conspirator’s conviction for the same conduct the defendant is accused of violates due process.