Spradling v. Texas; And Dunn v. Texas

Background

On September 4, 1980, two women walking together were killed in a hit-and-run. A man later identified himself as the driver, and on October 1, 1980, two separate indictments charged him with failing to stop and render aid to each victim. He was tried and convicted under the first indictment, received a five-year sentence and a $5,000 fine, and the jury recommended suspension of the prison sentence. The State then sought to try him under the second indictment, and he asked the trial court to dismiss that second charge as barred by former jeopardy; the trial court denied the motion, the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals denied leave to seek review, and the Supreme Court denied review.

Reasoning

The core question was whether Texas’s rule barring pretrial appeals prevents defendants from protecting their right not to be tried twice for the same act. Justice Brennan’s dissent explains that Texas provides no interlocutory review for criminal claims, so a defendant cannot get timely appellate review of a double‑jeopardy claim. He cites prior decisions saying double‑jeopardy claims are separable from guilt and that once a state gives appellate review it cannot deny it arbitrarily. Brennan would treat the two charges as arising from a single occurrence and would reverse the trial court’s refusal to dismiss the second charge.

Real world impact

Because the Court declined review, the State may proceed with the second prosecution, and defendants in Texas may lack a way to obtain pretrial appellate review of double‑jeopardy claims. This decision is not a final ruling on the constitutional question; a later court could reach a different result or provide review.

Dissents or concurrances

Justice Brennan, joined by Justice Marshall, dissented and would have granted review, reversed the trial court, and held the two charges must be prosecuted together as one occurrence.