SINCE THE EARLIEST PRONOUNCEMENT OF THE RIGHT OF THE STATE TO SEEK APPELLATE REVIEW IN CRIMINAL CASES, THIS AUTHORITY HAS BEEN LIMITED BY TWO TYPES OF CONSIDERATIONS. THE PROHIBITION AGAINST DOUBLE JEOPARDY HAS ALWAYS FORMED THE ULTIMATE BARRIER TO CRIMINAL APPEALS BY THE STATE. ALSO, WITHIN THIS FRAMEWORK, VARIOUS NON-CONSTITUTIONAL POLICY CONSIDERATIONS HAVE FURTHER CURTAILED SUCH REVIEW. THE THESIS OF THIS ARTICLE IS AS FOLLOWS: THE PROCEDURAL SAFEGUARDS AFFORDED CRIMINAL DEFENDANTS IN OUR MODERN SYSTEM OF CRIMINAL JUSTICE HAVE UNDERCUT THE POLICY CONSIDERATIONS TRADITIONALLY ESPOUSED TO LIMIT APPEALS BY THE STATE; THE ONLY VALID LIMIT ON THE STATE'S RIGHT TO SEEK JUDICIAL REVIEW TODAY IS THE DOUBLE JEOPARDY DOCTRINE; AND THE DOUBLE JEOPARDY DOCTRINE IS ONLY APPLICABLE TO PREVENT GOVERNMENTAL HARASSMENT AND OPPRESSION IN THE FORM OF MULTIPLE PROSECUTION OR MULTIPLE PUNISHMENT FOR THE SAME WRONGFUL CONDUCT. (AUTHOR ABSTRACT)