offenses. At least six states have caselaw explicitly outlining procedures for rendering a partial verdict. See Whiteake c. 807, 450 N.E.2d 20, 23 (1983) (same); Commonwealth v. Ray, 982 S.W.2d 671, 674 (Ky.Ct.App.1998) (same); People v. Booker, 208 Mich.App. 168, 527 N.W.2d 42, 48 (1994) (approving trial court's acceptance of "partial acquittals" on the greater charges of first- and second-degree murder, while allowing defendant to be retried on lesser-included offense of manslaughter); State v. Halsey, 232 Neb. 658, 441 N.W.2d 877, 880 (1989) (noting that trial court entered not-guilty verdict on greater charge of attempted first-degree murder, but declared mistrial as to lesser charge of attempted second-degree murder); State v. Grabowski, 644 A.2d 1282, 1286 (R.I.1994) (<HOLDING>); State v. Seagroves, 691 S.W.2d 537, 541
holding that when jury acquitted defendant on greater offense but deadlocked on lesserincluded offenses double jeopardy did not bar retrial of the lesers holding double jeopardy did not bar retrial where a jury could not render a verdict and a mistrial was granted holding that where jury was instructed on both a greater offense and lesserincluded offense and the jury convicted on the lesserincluded offense the double jeopardy provision prohibited retrial on the greater offense holding double jeopardy prohibition not applicable where jury unable to agree on greater charge but convicts on lesserincluded offense because no implied acquittal occurred on greater offense holding double jeopardy prohibits government appeal and retrial following valid judgment of acquittal entered by trial court after jury deadlocked on criminal contempt charge