A federal guilty plea would probably doom Manhattan DA Alvin Bragg’s separate state murder prosecution.
On hiatus, a friend brought to my attention reports that Luigi Mangione may plead guilty on Friday to charges stemming from the murder of United Healthcare CEO Brian Thompson. That would be in the federal case brought by the U.S. Attorney’s Office in Manhattan — a.k.a. the Southern District of New York (SDNY), my old haunts. I highlight federal because in New York, unlike most other states, a federal prosecution can nullify the state’s authority to prosecute crimes arising out of the same conduct.
Nearly two years ago — meaning, in late 2024, before President Trump began his second term but after he was prosecuted on ludicrous “hush money” charges by Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg, a progressive Democrat, resulting in 34 felony convictions — I explained that Bragg’s murder case against Mangione could be derailed unless he got cooperation from the then-incoming Trump Justice Department. This is due to double jeopardy principles, which more broadly protect defendants under New York law:
[T]he dual sovereignty doctrine is a carve-out from Fifth Amendment double jeopardy protection. Normally, a person in the United States may not be prosecuted twice for the same offense. That is not the rule, however, when cases are brought by different sovereigns — and in our federalist system, the federal and state governments are deemed separate sovereigns for these purposes. So, let’s say a person sells a kilogram of heroin in Colorado; he may be prosecuted by a state district attorney on that transaction even if he has already been acquitted in federal court for the same crime. The federal government and Colorado’s state government represent separate sovereigns; ergo, a successive prosecution by the latter is not barred by the former’s prosecution.
But that’s not how it works in the Empire State’s more defendant-friendly confines.
New York follows a doctrine of equitable double jeopardy that is significantly broader than federal double jeopardy under the Fifth Amendment. (See Section 40.20 of New York’s penal code.) The state’s doctrine holds that prosecutors, from whatever jurisdictions, should be limited to one attempt to try a defendant for any and all crimes that arise out of a single factual transaction. (E.g., a single drug deal — the “transaction” — may give rise to multiple crimes, such as conspiracy, attempt, transportation of illegal narcotics, possession with intent to distribute, etc.) New York state prosecutors are thus barred from bringing a subsequent prosecution if a different jurisdiction (i.e., a different sovereign, such as the federal government) has already prosecuted the same defendant for crimes arising out of the same transaction.
Notice, this is not limited to a second prosecution of the same exact crime, which is what double jeopardy — in the absence of dual sovereignty — ordinarily prohibits. New York is generally barred from prosecuting if a different sovereign previously prosecuted a case involving the same defendant for crimes stemming from the same course of conduct. So, let’s say a defendant robbed a bank, the feds charged him with the crime of bank robbery, and the jury either convicted or acquitted him; under state law, New York prosecutors would be barred from charging the same defendant with, say, conspiracy to commit bank robbery, because the conspiracy and the robbery arose out of the same criminal transaction.
Equitable double jeopardy has always given the SDNY a major advantage in turf battles with the DANY [i.e., the District Attorney of New York County — Manhattan]. If the SDNY and the DANY are investigating the same criminal transaction, and the SDNY quickly indicts and brings to court a boatload of federal charges, the DANY can be blocked from indicting the case.
Looked at the other way, the DANY has to prosecute first or it probably won’t be able to prosecute at all.
To repeat what I observed back in 2024, Bragg was able to pursue his case against Mangione because the Biden DOJ was cooperating, going about its work deliberately in order to allow DANY’s prosecution to get to trial first. The federal government follows dual sovereignty, not equitable double jeopardy, so a state conviction would not bar the DOJ from subsequently trying Mangione in the SDNY.
But by then, the Biden DOJ was in its final weeks. To be assured of getting to trial against Mangione, Bragg would need the Trump-controlled SDNY to play ball.
I raised that complication at the time because it seemed to me . . . shall we say . . . unlikely.
If Mangione pleads guilty in the SDNY today, Bragg could try to argue that the federal stalking case involves conduct sufficiently different from intentional homicide that it’s not really a second prosecution for the same act. I don’t think that will fly in New York. The pending federal charges carry a possible sentence of life imprisonment solely because Brian Thompson was killed. That’s essentially a federal murder charge, so a New York State murder charge derived from the same homicide would be barred.