The court decided that the original charges could not be reinstated.

The article indicated that in order to proceed, the state would have to start over and charge him again. It is unclear whether the state can use the same evidence and same charges or if it will need to have different evidence and different charges.

I expect this is a matter of Michigan's criminal procedure and not a matter of double jeopardy. It would not appear to me that jeopardy attached on the original charges. The arguments made focused on the unusual nature of the Attorney General intervening in a local prosecutor's decision to dismiss. That intervention appeared to have taken place after an article appeared before the midterm elections. The motion to reinstate appears to have been made prior to the elections.

I know a guy who knows a guy who can care of this for you - won't cost an arm or leg neither