In Ashe v. Swenson (1970), the trial court found the defendant guilty of robbing a particular victim at a poker game after he had been acquitted in a previous trial of robbing another victim at the same poker game. Upon appeal, the Missouri Supreme Court affirmed the conviction. The U.S. Supreme Court reversed this ruling, holding that in the circumstances of the case, the name of the victim had no bearing upon the issue of whether the petitioner was one of the robbers. In United States v. Wilson (1975), the district court dismissed the indictment on a post-verdict motion. The State's appeal of the district court's ruling was dismissed by the court of appeals, which held that the State could not constitutionally appeal the district court's dismissal (deemed by the court to be an acquittal) since it would violate the double jeopardy clause. The U.S. Supreme Court reversed the dismissal of the court of appeals, instructing it to consider the merits of the State's appeal. Illinois v. Somerville (1973) addressed whether declaration of a mistrial over the defendant's objection, because the trial court concluded that the indictment was insufficient to charge a crime, necessarily prevents a State from subsequently trying the defendant under a valid indictment. The Court ruled that it does not. 11 footnotes.