Does the Double Jeopardy Clause preclude a Federal jury from considering petitioner's guilt for murder under New Jersey law after a New Jersey jury acquitted him of that same offense?

QUESTIONS PRESENTED 1. Does the Double Jeopardy Clause of the Fifth Amendment preclude a Federal petit jury from considering petitioners guilt for murder, in violation of New Jersey's murder statute, after a New Jersey petit jury has acquitted him of that same murder charged pursuant to that same New Jersey statute? 2. Was the District Court required to instruct the jury as to the Governments burden to disprove passion provocation manslaughter as demanded by New Jersey’s application of its murder statute? 3. Did the District Court’s dismissal of three jurors, without any legitimate basis, violate Petitioner’s Sixth Amendment right to an impartial jury trial? 4. Did the District Court’s erroneous evidential rulings infringe upon appellant’s Sixth Amendment right to testify in his own defense? 5. Did the charging of petitioner, in a seventh superseding indictment with murder as a predicate RICO offense and a related VICAR count, constitute vindictive prosecution in violation of petitioner’s Fifth Amendment rights? i PARTIES TO PROCEEDING The