Does the principle of double jeopardy apply to different charges in the same case?
<p>For example, consider a serial killer who sexually assaults their victims before killing them.</p>
<p>For the sake of argument, let's say that the prosecutors are not able to successfully charge the serial killer with murder the first time around.</p>
<p>Later, investigators discover that the victims were raped before being killed. Could the prosecutors bring a new criminal case against the original perpetrator for rape, or would the principle of double jeopardy protect them from further prosecution?</p>

<h2><a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Double_Jeopardy_Clause" rel="nofollow noreferrer">Double jeopardy</a> does not apply to different offences</h2>
<blockquote>
<p>[N]or shall any person be subject for the same offence to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb...</p>
</blockquote>
<p>The Supreme Court has held that it means what it says - murder and rape are different offences and so the double jeopardy clause is not triggered.</p>
<p>However, if an offence requires that the same elements (or a subset of them) be proved, then they are the same offence. So, for example, both murder and rape normally incorporate the elements of common assault - a person acquitted of either murder or rape cannot subsequently be charged with common assault.</p>
<p>Further, the principle of <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Res_judicata" rel="nofollow noreferrer">res judicata</a> applies to criminal cases as well as civil cases. Therefore any fact or issue of law that was decided in the first trial cannot be reagitated in the second.</p>

united-states criminal-law double-jeopardy