## Facts

- Lamar Evans was prosecuted in Michigan state court for arson-type conduct labeled “burning other real property.”
- The trial judge mistakenly believed the prosecution had to prove, as an element, that the burned structure “was not a dwelling.”
- After the State rested, Evans moved for a directed verdict of acquittal.
- The judge evaluated the evidence and granted a directed verdict, finding the State had not proved the “not a dwelling” requirement.
- Michigan appellate courts reversed, reasoning the ruling rested on a legal mistake and therefore did not constitute an acquittal for double jeopardy purposes.
- The U.S. Supreme Court granted review.

## Issues

1. Whether the Double Jeopardy Clause permits retrial when a trial judge directs a verdict of acquittal because the State failed to prove a requirement the judge mistakenly treated as an element of the offense.

## Decision

- The Supreme Court reversed the Michigan Supreme Court.
- The Court held that the Double Jeopardy Clause barred retrial.
- The directed verdict was an acquittal because the trial judge determined the prosecution’s evidence was insufficient to establish criminal liability as the judge understood the offense.
- The correctness of the judge’s legal interpretation did not alter the ruling’s character as an acquittal.
- Justice Alito dissented.

## Legal Principles

- For double jeopardy purposes, an “acquittal” includes any ruling that the prosecution’s proof is insufficient to establish criminal liability, even if the ruling rests on legal error.
- Retrial is barred after a court-decreed acquittal, including acquittals resting on an “egregiously erroneous” legal foundation.
- The controlling inquiry is the substance of the ruling: whether the court resolved (rightly or wrongly) some or all of the factual elements the court treated as necessary to convict.
- By contrast, procedural dismissals or mistrials on grounds unrelated to factual guilt or innocence generally do not trigger double jeopardy protections.

## Conclusion

Because the trial judge granted a directed verdict after assessing the State’s evidence and finding it legally insufficient under an erroneous view of the offense’s requirements, the ruling was an acquittal, and the Double Jeopardy Clause prohibited Michigan from retrying Evans for the same offense.


Evans v. Michigan, 568 U.S. 313 (2013)