Mangione’s New Bid to Escape NY Murder Case: Same Gun, Same Killing

Mangione’s attorneys are pressing their double jeopardy argument, claiming he should not face New York murder charges after pleading guilty in federal court to conduct they describe as fundamentally the same offense.

Their position is that stalking someone with the intention of killing them, followed by the killing itself, amounts to the same underlying harm as murder.

The defense made that argument in response to Manhattan prosecutors, who urged a New York judge to reject Mangione’s request to dismiss the state charges. In his federal case, Mangione admitted to killing UnitedHealthcare CEO Brian Thompson, a 50-year-old father of two who was shot in the back outside a Hilton hotel in Manhattan.

Prosecutors contend that double jeopardy does not apply because Mangione was not ultimately prosecuted on federal firearms charges. They maintain the New York murder case should proceed, arguing that the alleged killing does not involve the same “harm or evil” as the federal stalking charges. They also say Mangione’s decision to abandon a possible “extreme emotional disturbance” defense under New York law does not establish that the federal case blocked him from pursuing it.

In a response made public over the weekend, defense attorneys Karen Friedman Agnifilo, Marc Agnifilo and Jacob Kaplan challenged each of those claims.

The lawyers first argued that Mangione was still “prosecuted” for the federal firearms offenses even though those counts were dismissed, meaning the constitutional protection against double jeopardy remains relevant.

“The statutory definition of being ‘prosecuted’ for an offense does not require that the defendant plead guilty to that specific offense,” Mangione’s attorneys wrote.

Mangione pleaded guilty to two federal counts after initially facing a broader indictment.

“In other words, when Mangione pleaded guilty to the federal indictment, the criminal action in which he had been charged with possession and use of the firearm was terminated for statutory double jeopardy purposes,” the attorneys wrote.

NEXT UP: NYC Marathon Runner Rachel Apa Died of Rare Rhabdomyolysis

The defense also argued that allegedly stalking Thompson with the intent to kill him constitutes the same “core misconduct” as the murder. Because New York’s double jeopardy protections are broader than those in the U.S. Constitution, prosecutors must demonstrate that the state charges target a different harm from the federal offenses to which Mangione pleaded guilty.

“One of the harms clearly addressed by the expansive federal stalking statute is stalking with the intent to kill and resulting in the killing of the person stalked,” the defense wrote. “It is a statute that, like a state murder statute, is intended to keep people safe from being murdered — the oldest crime there is.”

The attorneys acknowledged that the federal stalking charge includes additional requirements, such as interstate travel and electronic communications. However, they argued those elements are separate from the central harm at issue: the killing of another person.

“Travel and electronics are not the evils or harms being prevented,” they wrote. “The federal government does have an interest, however, in preventing people from [traveling] or using electronics as part of the crime of killing another person, or intending to do so. That is what makes the stalking statute similar to the murder statute in terms of the evils or harms both are looking to prevent.”

Mangione’s legal team is asking Judge Gregory Carro to dismiss the state murder charges.

The Manhattan District Attorney’s Office, led by Alvin Bragg, did not immediately respond to a request for comment.