NEW YORK (AP) — Five years after Harvey Weinstein was convicted of rape and hauled to jail in handcuffs, the former movie mogul returns to a Manhattan courthouse today for a new trial covering the very same allegations — plus one that hasn’t been tried before.

It isn’t double jeopardy, but rather a legal redo after a New York appeals court overturned the landmark #MeToo verdict a year ago.

The state’s Court of Appeals threw out Weinstein’s convictions and 23-year prison sentence and ordered a new trial after finding that the original one was tilted by “egregious” judicial rulings and prejudicial testimony.

Jury selection could take a few days. Opening statements and the start of testimony are expected next week. Judge Curtis Farber said that in addition to 12 jurors, six alternates will be picked. Prosecutors expect the retrial to last a month.

Here’s what you need to know about Weinstein’s retrial:

HOW IS THE TRIAL DIFFERENT FROM 2020?

In some ways, the new trial will be two trials spliced into one.

Weinstein, 73, faces charges involving two women from his original trial in 2020, Jessica Mann and Miriam Haley, and he’s being tried for the first time on an allegation from a woman who wasn’t in the first case.

Weinstein has pleaded not guilty and denies that he raped or sexually assaulted anyone. Prosecutors are not allowed to retry Weinstein on certain counts that he was acquitted of during his first trial, including charges of predatory sexual assault and one count of first-degree rape.

The judicial reboot will play out in a different climate than Weinstein’s first trial, which drew intense media attention and saw protesters chanting “rapist” outside the courthouse.

The #MeToo movement, spawned by scores of allegations in 2017 against the ex-studio boss, has evolved and ebbed over time, and Weinstein has since been convicted in a separate rape case in Los Angeles — a verdict he is also appealing.

While some stars are still facing a legal reckoning for alleged sexual misconduct — like Sean “Diddy” Combs, who is set to go to trial next month — the drumbeat of allegations against powerful figures has abated from #MeToo’s early days.

WHAT IS WEINSTEIN ACCUSED OF?

Weinstein is being retried on two charges from his original trial: one count of criminal sex act for allegedly forcibly performing oral sex on a movie and TV production assistant in 2006 and one count of third-degree rape for allegedly assaulting an aspiring actor in a Manhattan hotel room in 2013.

WHAT IS THE NEW CHARGE HE FACES?

In addition to Haley and Mann, Weinstein is also charged with one count of criminal sex act for allegedly forcing oral sex on a different woman at a Manhattan hotel in 2006.

That woman, who was not part of Weinstein’s first trial, has not been named publicly. The Associated Press does not generally identify people alleging sexual assault unless they consent to be named, as Haley and Mann have done.

Prosecutors said that the woman came forward to them just days before the start of Weinstein’s first trial but was not part of that case. They said they did not pursue the women’s allegations after Weinstein’s conviction, but revisited them and secured a new indictment after the first verdict was thrown out.

Weinstein’s lawyers contend that prosecutors shouldn’t have waited nearly five years to bring the additional charge.

WHY IS THERE

A NEW TRIAL?

New York’s highest court, the Court of Appeals, threw out Weinstein’s conviction in April 2024.

In a 4-3 decision, the court said then-Judge James Burke had denied Weinstein a fully fair trial by letting three women testify about allegations that weren’t part of the case and his decision to let prosecutors confront Weinstein, if he had testified, over his history of brutish behavior.

The court labeled the allegations against Weinstein “appalling, shameful, repulsive conduct” but warned that “destroying a defendant’s character under the guise of prosecutorial need” did not justify some trial evidence and testimony. Burke’s term expired at the end of 2022, and he is no longer a judge.

In a dissenting opinion, Court of Appeals Judge Madeline Singas wrote that her colleagues in the majority were continuing a “disturbing trend of overturning juries’ guilty verdicts in cases involving sexual violence.”

The ruling came at “the expense and safety of women,” she wrote.