This section contains the nature of the case and procedural background.

Somerville (D) was indicted for theft and a tried. Before any evidence had been presented, the prosecuting attorney realized that the indictment was fatally deficient under Illinois law because it did not allege that D intended to permanently deprive the owner of his property. Such a defect could not be cured by amendment. The Government's motion for a mistrial was granted. A second indictment was then handed down, and D claimed double jeopardy. That was denied, and D was convicted and appealed. The conviction was upheld, and D applied for habeas corpus. The case eventually made its way to the Supreme Court on denial by the Seventh Circuit and remand for reconsideration in light of United States v. Jorn. On remand, the Seventh Circuit held that double jeopardy applied. The Supreme Court granted certiorari.

The legal issues presented in this case will be displayed here.

The court's holding and decision will be displayed here.

Legal analysis from Dean's Law Dictionary will be displayed here.