A Philadelphia Pennsylvania Rule 5a Petition for Permission to Appeal Order Denying Motion to Bar Re prosecution Under Double Jeopardy Clause is a legal document filed in the state of Pennsylvania. This petition is specifically related to cases where a defendant seeks to prevent their re-prosecution for a crime they have already been tried and acquitted or convicted for, citing the Double Jeopardy Clause of the United States Constitution. When a defendant believes that they are being subjected to double jeopardy by the state seeking to retry them for the same offense, they can file a Rule 5a Petition for Permission to Appeal the Order Denying their Motion to Bar Re prosecution. This petition requests the court's permission to appeal the denial of their motion, emphasizing that their constitutional rights are at stake. Typically, this type of petition presents a detailed argument outlining the reasons why the re-prosecution violates the Double Jeopardy Clause. It may discuss previous legal precedents and relevant court decisions to support the defendant's position. The petitioner may also highlight any errors or legal issues during the initial trial, which should bar a new trial from taking place. It is important to note that there may be different contexts or variations of the Philadelphia Pennsylvania Rule 5a Petition for Permission to Appeal Order Denying Motion to Bar Re prosecution Under Double Jeopardy Clause. For instance, a petitioner may argue that re-prosecution is barred due to being acquitted previously, whereas another petitioner might assert that re-prosecution would violate the principle of collateral estoppel, preventing relitigation of an issue resolved in a previous trial. To conclude, a Philadelphia Pennsylvania Rule 5a Petition for Permission to Appeal Order Denying Motion to Bar Re prosecution Under Double Jeopardy Clause is a legal document filed by defendants seeking to prevent their re-prosecution for a crime they have already been tried for, based on the Double Jeopardy Clause. Each petition may vary in its specific arguments and legal grounds, depending on the circumstances of the case.