In a South Dakota trial court, a jury convicted Monte Rushmore for involuntary manslaughter, a lesser included offense of the original charge of murder. There were some errors in the trial that affected some of Monte Rushmore's legal rights

Question

In the South Dakota court of appeals, Monte successfully appealed his conviction of involuntary manslaughter, and the appellate court reversed the conviction based on erroneous admission of evidence. In the future
A) Monte Rushmore could be tried for murder since his appeal of the original conviction of involuntary murder indicated that he wanted a new trial of the original charge of murder. His appeal has waived any double jeopardy argument that he might otherwise have been able to make.
B) the prosecutor could try Monte Rushmore for involuntary manslaughter for the same act but could not retry him for the original charge of murder.
C) Monte Rushmore cannot be retried on any charge relating to the same transaction or occurrence since he has been in jeopardy once at the original trial, and to try him again would violate the federal constitutional prohibition against double jeopardy as applied to the states.
D) the South Dakota prosecutor could bring the case a second time, and Monte Rushmore could be tried for whatever crime, even the original murder charge that the prosecutor felt the evidence could prove.
E) if the prosecutor brings the case, based on the same facts, Monte Rushmore should be able to get the prosecution stopped using the doctrine of collateral estoppel.

Answer 1

B