arizona
washington
argued
october
decided
february
respondent
found
guilty
murder
arizona
trial
granted
new
trial
prosecution
withheld
exculpatory
evidence
defense
beginning
new
trial
trial
judge
extended
argument
granted
prosecutor
motion
mistrial
predicated
improper
prejudicial
comment
defense
counsel
opening
statement
evidence
hidden
respondent
first
trial
judge
expressly
find
manifest
necessity
mistrial
expressly
state
considered
alternative
solutions
arizona
refused
review
mistrial
ruling
respondent
sought
writ
habeas
corpus
federal
district
agreeing
defense
counsel
opening
statement
improper
held
respondent
placed
jeopardy
granted
writ
state
trial
judge
failed
find
manifest
necessity
mistrial
appeals
affirmed
held
although
extent
possible
juror
bias
measured
trial
judges
might
proceeded
trial
giving
jury
appropriate
cautionary
instructions
nevertheless
overriding
interest
evenhanded
administration
justice
requires
highest
degree
respect
accorded
trial
judge
decision
declare
mistrial
based
assessment
prejudicial
impact
defense
counsel
opening
statement
pp
record
supports
conclusion
trial
judge
exercised
sound
discretion
declaring
mistrial
appearing
acted
responsibly
deliberately
accorded
careful
consideration
respondent
interest
trial
concluded
single
proceeding
therefore
mistrial
order
supported
high
degree
necessity
required
case
kind
pp
since
record
provides
sufficient
justification
trial
judge
mistrial
ruling
ruling
subject
collateral
attack
federal
simply
judge
failed
make
explicit
finding
manifest
necessity
mistrial
avoid
valid
double
jeopardy
plea
articulate
record
factors
informed
deliberate
exercise
discretion
pp
stevens
delivered
opinion
burger
stewart
powell
rehnquist
joined
blackmun
concurred
result
white
filed
dissenting
opinion
post
marshall
filed
dissenting
opinion
brennan
joined
post
stephen
neely
argued
cause
filed
brief
petitioner
ed
bolding
argued
cause
respondent
brief
frederick
klein
justice
stevens
delivered
opinion
arizona
trial
judge
granted
prosecutor
motion
mistrial
predicated
improper
prejudicial
comment
defense
counsel
opening
statement
subsequent
habeas
corpus
proceeding
federal
district
held
double
jeopardy
clause
protected
defendant
another
trial
appeals
ninth
circuit
affirmed
questions
presented
whether
record
reflects
kind
necessity
mistrial
ruling
avoid
valid
plea
double
jeopardy
whether
plea
must
nevertheless
allowed
arizona
trial
judge
fully
explain
reasons
mistrial
ruling
respondent
found
guilty
murdering
hotel
night
clerk
superior
pima
county
ordered
new
trial
prosecutor
withheld
exculpatory
evidence
defense
arizona
affirmed
new
trial
order
unpublished
opinion
respondent
second
trial
began
january
voir
dire
examination
prospective
jurors
prosecutor
made
reference
fact
witnesses
whose
testimony
jurors
hear
testified
proceedings
four
years
earlier
defense
counsel
told
prospective
jurors
evidence
hidden
respondent
last
trial
opening
statement
made
point
forcefully
hear
testimony
notwithstanding
fact
trial
may
matter
prosecutor
hid
statements
give
lawyer
george
saying
man
spanish
speaking
give
statements
hid
hear
evidence
suppressed
hidden
prosecutor
case
hear
evidence
purposely
withheld
hear
misconduct
county
attorney
time
withheld
evidence
arizona
granted
new
trial
case
app
following
morning
prosecutor
renewed
mistrial
motion
fortified
evening
research
argued
theory
basis
new
trial
ruling
brought
attention
jury
prejudice
jury
repaired
cautionary
instructions
mistrial
manifest
necessity
defense
counsel
stated
still
prepared
authority
supporting
belief
opinion
admissible
argued
comment
invited
prosecutor
reference
witnesses
earlier
testimony
prejudice
avoided
curative
instructions
extended
argument
trial
judge
expressed
concern
possibility
erroneous
mistrial
ruling
preclude
another
trial
ultimately
trial
judge
granted
motion
stating
ruling
based
upon
defense
counsel
remarks
opening
statement
concerning
arizona
opinion
trial
judge
expressly
find
manifest
necessity
mistrial
expressly
state
considered
alternative
solutions
concluded
none
adequate
arizona
refused
review
mistrial
ruling
respondent
filed
petition
writ
habeas
corpus
district
district
arizona
alleging
another
trial
violate
double
jeopardy
clause
reviewing
transcript
state
proceeding
hearing
arguments
counsel
federal
district
judge
noted
arizona
trial
judge
canvassed
record
possibility
alternatives
mistrial
expressed
view
granting
mistrial
motion
judge
required
find
manifest
necessity
exists
granting
record
contained
finding
federal
judge
prepared
make
finding
granted
writ
agreed
state
however
defense
counsel
opening
statement
improper
ninth
circuit
also
characterized
opening
statement
improper
affirmed
absent
finding
manifest
necessity
explicit
consideration
alternatives
unwilling
infer
jury
prevented
arriving
fair
impartial
verdict
concurring
opinion
two
judges
noted
question
manifest
necessity
argued
argument
mistrial
motion
concerned
question
whether
opening
statement
improper
concluded
absent
findings
manifest
necessity
existed
quite
possible
grant
mistrial
based
fact
impropriety
counsel
conduct
established
without
reaching
question
whether
nevertheless
fair
trial
persuaded
appeals
applied
inappropriate
standard
review
mistrial
rulings
kind
attached
undue
significance
form
ruling
therefore
reverse
ii
state
may
put
defendant
jeopardy
twice
offense
benton
maryland
constitutional
protection
double
jeopardy
unequivocally
prohibits
second
trial
following
acquittal
public
interest
finality
criminal
judgments
strong
acquitted
defendant
may
retried
even
though
acquittal
based
upon
egregiously
erroneous
foundation
see
fong
foo
innocence
accused
confirmed
final
judgment
constitution
conclusively
presumes
second
trial
unfair
jeopardy
attaches
judgment
becomes
final
constitutional
protection
also
embraces
defendant
valued
right
trial
completed
particular
tribunal
reasons
valued
right
merits
constitutional
protection
worthy
repetition
even
first
trial
completed
second
prosecution
may
grossly
unfair
increases
financial
emotional
burden
accused
prolongs
period
stigmatized
unresolved
accusation
wrongdoing
may
even
enhance
risk
innocent
defendant
may
convicted
danger
unfairness
defendant
exists
whenever
trial
aborted
completed
consequently
general
rule
prosecutor
entitled
one
one
opportunity
require
accused
stand
trial
unlike
situation
trial
ended
acquittal
conviction
retrial
automatically
barred
criminal
proceeding
terminated
without
finally
resolving
merits
charges
accused
variety
circumstances
may
make
necessary
discharge
jury
trial
concluded
circumstances
invariably
create
unfairness
accused
valued
right
trial
concluded
particular
tribunal
sometimes
subordinate
public
interest
affording
prosecutor
one
full
fair
opportunity
present
evidence
impartial
jury
yet
view
importance
right
fact
frustrated
mistrial
prosecutor
must
shoulder
burden
justifying
mistrial
avoid
double
jeopardy
bar
burden
heavy
one
prosecutor
must
demonstrate
manifest
necessity
mistrial
declared
objection
defendant
words
manifest
necessity
appropriately
characterize
magnitude
prosecutor
burden
reason
justice
story
classic
formulation
test
quoted
provide
guidance
decision
wide
variety
cases
nevertheless
words
describe
standard
applied
mechanically
without
attention
particular
problem
confronting
trial
judge
indeed
manifest
key
word
necessity
interpreted
literally
instead
contrary
teaching
webster
assume
degrees
necessity
require
high
degree
concluding
mistrial
appropriate
question
whether
high
degree
reached
answered
easily
kinds
cases
others
one
extreme
cases
prosecutor
requests
mistrial
order
buttress
weaknesses
evidence
although
time
english
judges
served
stuart
monarchs
exercising
power
discharge
jury
whenever
appeared
crown
evidence
insufficient
convict
prohibition
double
jeopardy
evolved
country
plainly
intended
condemn
abhorrent
practice
noted
dinitz
double
jeopardy
clause
protect
defendant
governmental
actions
intended
provoke
mistrial
requests
thereby
subject
defendants
substantial
burdens
imposed
multiple
prosecutions
bars
retrials
conduct
judge
prosecutor
threatens
arassment
accused
successive
prosecutions
declaration
mistrial
afford
prosecution
favorable
opportunity
convict
defendant
extreme
mistrial
premised
upon
trial
judge
belief
jury
unable
reach
verdict
long
considered
classic
basis
proper
mistrial
argument
jury
inability
agree
establishes
reasonable
doubt
defendant
guilt
therefore
requires
acquittal
uniformly
rejected
country
instead
without
exception
courts
held
trial
judge
may
discharge
genuinely
deadlocked
jury
require
defendant
submit
second
trial
rule
accords
recognition
society
interest
giving
prosecution
one
complete
opportunity
convict
violated
laws
moreover
situation
especially
compelling
reasons
allowing
trial
judge
exercise
broad
discretion
deciding
whether
manifest
necessity
justifies
discharge
jury
one
hand
discharges
jury
deliberations
may
produce
fair
verdict
defendant
deprived
valued
right
trial
completed
particular
tribunal
fails
discharge
jury
unable
reach
verdict
protracted
exhausting
deliberations
exists
significant
risk
verdict
may
result
pressures
inherent
situation
rather
considered
judgment
jurors
retrial
defendant
barred
whenever
appellate
views
necessity
mistrial
differently
trial
judge
danger
latter
cognizant
serious
societal
consequences
erroneous
ruling
employ
coercive
means
break
apparent
deadlock
rule
frustrate
public
interest
judgments
trial
judge
decision
declare
mistrial
considers
jury
deadlocked
therefore
accorded
great
deference
reviewing
persuaded
along
spectrum
trial
problems
may
warrant
mistrial
vary
amenability
appellate
scrutiny
difficulty
led
mistrial
case
also
falls
area
trial
judge
determination
entitled
special
respect
case
trial
judge
ordered
mistrial
defendant
lawyer
made
improper
prejudicial
remarks
opening
statement
jury
although
respondent
insists
evidence
prosecutorial
misconduct
admissible
matter
arizona
law
therefore
opening
statement
proper
regard
issue
foreclosed
respondent
failure
proffer
arizona
precedent
supportive
contention
state
interpretation
law
buttressed
consistent
opinion
federal
district
appeals
cf
bishop
wood
therefore
start
premise
defense
counsel
comment
improper
may
affected
impartiality
jury
recognize
extent
possible
bias
measured
district
quite
correct
believing
trial
judges
might
proceeded
trial
giving
jury
appropriate
cautionary
instructions
strict
literal
sense
mistrial
necessary
nevertheless
overriding
interest
evenhanded
administration
justice
requires
accord
highest
degree
respect
trial
judge
evaluation
likelihood
impartiality
one
jurors
may
affected
improper
comment
consistent
course
decision
cases
involving
possible
juror
bias
supports
conclusion
simmons
involved
possibility
bias
caused
newspaper
story
describing
letter
written
defense
counsel
denying
charge
third
party
one
jurors
acquainted
defendant
without
determining
truth
falsity
charge
without
examining
jurors
ascertain
influence
story
upon
trial
judge
declared
mistrial
considered
impossible
future
consideration
case
jury
true
independence
freedom
action
part
juror
necessary
fair
trial
accused
affirmed
holding
judge
justified
concluding
publication
letter
made
impossible
jury
act
independence
freedom
part
juror
requisite
fair
trial
issue
parties
thompson
concluded
mistrial
required
revealed
one
trial
jurors
served
grand
jury
indicted
defendant
since
possible
grand
jury
heard
evidence
perhaps
even
less
presented
trial
since
juror
question
may
actual
bias
defendant
record
demonstrate
mistrial
strictly
necessary
doubt
however
validity
conclusion
possibility
bias
justified
mistrial
improper
opening
statement
unquestionably
tends
frustrate
public
interest
judgment
reached
impartial
tribunal
indeed
statements
create
risk
often
present
individual
juror
bias
situation
entire
panel
may
tainted
trial
judge
course
may
instruct
jury
disregard
improper
comment
extreme
cases
may
discipline
counsel
even
remove
trial
dinitz
actions
however
necessarily
remove
risk
bias
may
created
improper
argument
unless
unscrupulous
defense
counsel
allowed
unfair
advantage
trial
judge
must
power
declare
mistrial
appropriate
cases
interest
orderly
impartial
procedure
impaired
deterred
exercising
power
concern
time
reviewing
disagreed
assessment
trial
situation
retrial
automatically
barred
adoption
stringent
standard
appellate
review
area
therefore
seriously
impede
trial
judge
proper
performance
duty
order
protect
integrity
trial
take
prompt
affirmative
action
stop
professional
misconduct
compelling
institutional
considerations
militating
favor
appellate
deference
trial
judge
evaluation
significance
possible
juror
bias
seen
heard
jurors
voir
dire
examination
judge
familiar
evidence
background
case
trial
listened
tone
argument
delivered
observed
apparent
reaction
jurors
short
far
conversant
factors
relevant
determination
reviewing
possibly
see
wade
hunter
iii
conclusion
trial
judge
decision
declare
mistrial
based
assessment
prejudicial
impact
improper
argument
entitled
great
deference
course
end
inquiry
noted
earlier
constitutionally
protected
interest
inevitably
affected
mistrial
decision
trial
judge
therefore
must
always
temper
decision
whether
abort
trial
considering
importance
defendant
able
conclude
confrontation
society
verdict
tribunal
might
believe
favorably
disposed
fate
jorn
harlan
order
ensure
interest
adequately
protected
reviewing
courts
obligation
satisfy
words
justice
story
trial
judge
exercised
sound
discretion
declaring
mistrial
thus
trial
judge
acts
irrationally
irresponsibly
cf
jorn
supra
see
illinois
somerville
action
condoned
review
record
indicates
case
defense
counsel
aired
improper
highly
prejudicial
evidence
jury
possible
impact
trial
judge
best
position
assess
trial
judge
act
precipitately
response
prosecutor
request
mistrial
contrary
evincing
concern
possible
double
jeopardy
consequences
erroneous
ruling
gave
defense
counsel
prosecutor
full
opportunity
explain
positions
propriety
mistrial
therefore
persuaded
record
trial
judge
acted
responsibly
deliberately
accorded
careful
consideration
respondent
interest
trial
concluded
single
proceeding
since
exercised
sound
discretion
handling
sensitive
problem
possible
juror
bias
created
improper
comment
defense
counsel
mistrial
order
supported
high
degree
necessity
required
case
kind
neither
party
right
case
decided
jury
may
tainted
bias
circumstances
public
interest
fair
trials
designed
end
judgments
must
prevail
defendant
valued
right
trial
concluded
first
jury
impaneled
iv
one
final
matter
requires
consideration
absence
explicit
finding
manifest
necessity
appears
determinative
district
may
appeals
courts
regarded
omission
critical
required
much
since
record
provides
sufficient
justification
ruling
failure
explain
ruling
completely
render
constitutionally
defective
review
trial
decision
course
facilitated
findings
explanation
reasons
supporting
decision
matter
desirable
procedural
assistance
may
constitutionally
mandated
case
cf
cupp
naughten
basis
trial
judge
mistrial
order
adequately
disclosed
record
includes
extensive
argument
counsel
prior
judge
ruling
state
trial
judge
mistrial
declaration
subject
collateral
attack
federal
simply
failed
find
manifest
necessity
words
articulate
record
factors
informed
deliberate
exercise
discretion
judgment
appeals
reversed
footnotes
prosecutor
reference
context
asking
venire
whether
able
credit
testimony
witness
inconsistencies
present
testimony
given
earlier
proceedings
conceive
opinion
arizona
case
admissible
basis
whatsoever
bolding
really
try
additional
work
honor
try
find
law
believe
admissible
corroborative
testimony
jury
hear
afraid
know
stop
getting
point
trying
county
attorney
office
county
attorney
office
conduct
whatever
last
case
simply
going
allow
trial
goes
sorely
tempted
grant
state
motion
time
bolding
well
honor
sorry
happens
tells
examine
witness
decision
furnish
law
says
yes
come
abide
decision
honor
working
like
reserve
right
present
outside
hearing
jury
another
time
believe
credible
evidence
thinking
know
top
head
opinion
evidence
experts
evidence
believe
truly
corroborative
evidence
jury
hear
certainly
like
reserve
right
present
find
written
law
allow
type
testimony
honor
evidence
app
worked
stage
yet
think
necessary
bring
evidence
apparently
counsel
made
opening
statement
prepared
support
admissibility
testimony
legal
authority
prosecutor
cure
honor
mistrial
state
well
aware
position
taking
wrong
mistrial
proper
man
walks
know
expressed
concern
mr
butler
respondent
filed
special
action
proceeding
nature
writ
mandamus
prohibition
see
rev
stat
rules
procedure
special
actions
rule
petition
writ
habeas
corpus
respondent
also
moved
trial
dismiss
quash
information
petitioner
raise
question
adequacy
respondent
exhaustion
available
state
remedies
app
district
indicated
simple
statement
trial
judge
effect
manifest
necessity
mistrial
sufficed
defeat
double
jeopardy
claim
opinion
appeals
judge
kilkenny
stated
absence
clear
abuse
normally
inclined
uphold
discretionary
orders
nature
usual
case
trial
judge
observed
event
heard
counsel
made
specific
findings
circumstances
mistrial
declaration
accompanied
finding
jury
longer
render
impartial
verdict
lightly
set
aside
opinion
originally
released
stated
decline
imply
impropriety
jury
completely
prevented
arriving
fair
impartial
verdict
app
subsequently
amended
opinion
delete
word
completely
sentence
originally
written
opinion
implied
probability
jury
prejudice
sufficient
ground
mistrial
certainty
prejudice
suffice
description
right
quoted
justice
harlan
plurality
opinion
jorn
illinois
somerville
formulated
justice
black
opinion
wade
hunter
complete
sentence
identifies
right
sometimes
subordinate
larger
interest
trial
end
judgment
said
enough
show
defendant
valued
right
trial
completed
particular
tribunal
must
instances
subordinated
public
interest
fair
trials
designed
end
judgments
ibid
reprosecution
mistrial
unnecessarily
declared
trial
obviously
subjects
defendant
personal
strain
insecurity
regardless
motivation
underlying
trial
judge
action
jorn
supra
justice
black
stated
green
underlying
idea
one
deeply
ingrained
least
system
jurisprudence
state
resources
power
allowed
make
repeated
attempts
convict
individual
alleged
offense
thereby
subjecting
embarrassment
expense
ordeal
compelling
live
continuing
state
anxiety
insecurity
well
enhancing
possibility
even
though
innocent
may
found
guilty
emphasis
added
carsey
app
judge
leventhal
described
subtle
changes
state
testimony
initially
favorable
defendant
may
occur
course
successive
prosecutions
government
witnesses
came
drop
testimony
impressions
favorable
defendant
thus
key
prosecution
witness
last
person
see
appellant
deceased
together
began
testifying
acted
evening
like
newlyweds
honeymoon
without
unfriendly
word
spoken
ended
saying
first
time
four
trials
words
firm
possibly
harsh
cross
also
note
police
officer
readily
acquiesced
two
hung
jury
trials
appellant
hysterical
later
withheld
characterization
shift
though
less
dramatic
means
inconsequential
view
significance
appellant
condition
time
made
statement
inconsistent
later
told
another
officer
stated
illinois
somerville
supra
determination
trial
abort
criminal
proceeding
jeopardy
attached
one
lightly
undertaken
since
interest
defendant
fate
determined
jury
first
impaneled
weighty
one
lack
demonstrable
additional
prejudice
preclude
defendant
invocation
double
jeopardy
bar
absence
important
countervailing
interest
proper
judicial
administration
opinion
announcing
judgment
jorn
supra
justice
harlan
explained
rigid
application
particular
tribunal
principle
unacceptable
criminal
trial
even
best
circumstances
complicated
affair
manage
readily
apparent
mechanical
rule
prohibiting
retrial
whenever
circumstances
compel
discharge
jury
without
defendant
consent
high
price
pay
added
assurance
personal
security
freedom
governmental
harassment
mechanical
rule
provide
whether
phrase
manifest
necessity
evident
necessity
see
winsor
queen
cockburn
imperious
necessity
see
downum
used
meaning
apparently
think
cases
nature
law
invested
courts
justice
authority
discharge
jury
giving
verdict
whenever
opinion
taking
circumstances
consideration
manifest
necessity
act
ends
public
justice
otherwise
defeated
exercise
sound
discretion
subject
impossible
define
circumstances
render
proper
interfere
sure
power
used
greatest
caution
urgent
circumstances
plain
obvious
causes
right
order
discharge
security
public
faithful
sound
conscientious
exercise
discretion
rests
cases
upon
responsibility
judges
oaths
office
perez
wheat
see
wade
hunter
proceeding
terminated
military
necessity
simmons
possible
juror
bias
perez
supra
hung
jury
noted
illinois
somerville
perez
formulation
consistently
adhered
subsequent
decisions
abjures
application
mechanical
formula
judge
propriety
declaring
mistrial
varying
often
unique
situations
arising
course
criminal
trial
english
courts
long
recognized
truth
proposition
hung
jury
context
rule
taken
literally
seems
command
confinement
jury
till
death
agree
avoid
consequence
exception
introduced
practice
blackstone
described
words
except
case
evident
necessity
exception
expressed
given
rise
doubts
necessity
equivocal
word
meaning
either
irresistible
compulsion
high
degree
need
interested
objecting
discharge
jury
verdict
disputed
whether
discharge
necessary
stricter
sense
word
dispute
meaning
word
necessity
exception
rule
source
main
questions
raised
upon
writ
error
substance
answered
decide
meaning
word
exception
rule
apply
meaning
facts
appearing
record
assume
clear
discharge
jury
verdict
may
lawful
time
circumstances
reference
facts
record
hold
judge
first
trial
law
power
discharge
jury
verdict
high
degree
need
discharge
made
evident
mind
facts
ascertained
define
degree
need
without
standard
comparison
approach
nearer
precision
describing
degree
high
degree
wider
sense
word
might
denoted
necessity
winsor
queen
supra
whitebread
tr
see
also
queen
charlesworth
eng
friedland
double
jeopardy
sigler
double
jeopardy
douglas
almanac
liberty
reaction
rule
developed
england
judge
discharge
jury
prior
verdict
except
cases
evident
necessity
winsor
queen
supra
however
example
judge
discharged
jury
key
witness
crown
refused
testify
see
queen
charlesworth
supra
accused
nevertheless
retried
jeopardy
attached
english
rule
winsor
queen
supra
queen
charlesworth
supra
friedland
supra
reigns
latter
sovereigns
stuart
family
different
rule
prevailed
jury
case
might
discharged
purpose
better
evidence
future
day
power
exercised
benefit
crown
doctrine
abhorrent
every
principle
safety
security
receive
least
countenance
courts
country
time
james
ii
since
revolution
doctrine
came
examination
rule
laid
lord
coke
revived
state
garrigues
example
prosecutor
proceeds
trial
aware
key
witnesses
available
give
testimony
mistrial
later
granted
reason
second
prosecution
barred
downum
prohibition
double
jeopardy
unquestionably
forbids
prosecutor
use
first
proceeding
trial
run
case
note
twice
jeopardy
yale
justice
douglas
noted
downum
supra
harassment
accused
successive
prosecutions
declaration
mistrial
afford
prosecution
favorable
opportunity
convict
examples
jeopardy
attaches
downum
supra
public
interest
fair
judgments
recent
origin
take
upon
without
consent
parties
discharge
jury
satisfied
fully
considered
case
agree
hope
judge
shrink
taking
course
jury
agree
coerce
personal
suffering
expose
parties
danger
verdict
result
conviction
minds
jury
produced
suffering
mind
body
queen
charlesworth
eng
perez
wheat
logan
moss
glenn
keerl
montana
dreyer
illinois
noted
however
rationale
deference
hung
jury
situation
trial
best
position
assess
factors
must
considered
making
necessarily
discretionary
determination
whether
jury
able
reach
verdict
continues
deliberate
record
reveals
trial
judge
failed
exercise
sound
discretion
entrusted
reason
deference
appellate
disappears
thus
trial
judge
acts
reasons
completely
unrelated
trial
problem
purports
basis
mistrial
ruling
close
appellate
scrutiny
appropriate
cf
gordy
course
express
opinion
regarding
whether
failure
prosecutor
hand
brady
brady
maryland
material
defense
first
trial
deliberate
inadvertent
decision
arizona
granting
respondent
new
trial
opinion
specifically
address
matter
simply
accept
purpose
analysis
respondent
characterization
failure
disclose
evidence
misconduct
respondent
relies
state
burruell
arizona
decision
supportive
admissibility
tr
oral
arg
case
however
simply
stands
proposition
witness
may
impeached
evidence
tending
show
interest
giving
testimony
favorable
state
defendant
undoubtedly
proper
defense
counsel
use
statements
suppressed
first
trial
second
trial
nothing
burruell
suggest
fact
suppression
admissible
purpose
second
trial
example
suggestion
individual
juror
bias
may
possible
replace
juror
alternate
concurring
opinion
dinitz
chief
justice
burger
emphasized
narrow
purpose
scope
legitimate
opening
statement
state
evidence
presented
make
easier
jurors
understand
follow
relate
parts
evidence
testimony
whole
occasion
argument
make
statements
supported
proof
relates
significant
elements
case
professional
misconduct
moreover
fundamentally
unfair
opposing
party
allow
attorney
standing
prestige
inherent
officer
present
jury
statements
susceptible
proof
intended
influence
jury
reaching
verdict
considerations
must
least
weighty
federal
considering
state
prisoner
collateral
challenge
conviction
ground
violated
double
jeopardy
clause
reviews
determination
state
trial
judge
juror
bias
case
defense
counsel
made
brief
reference
voir
dire
fact
evidence
withheld
defense
previous
trial
later
voir
dire
prosecutor
expressed
concern
trial
judge
jurors
aware
fact
respondent
obtained
new
trial
prosecution
failed
produce
evidence
might
prejudiced
state
response
prosecutor
concern
trial
judge
conducted
inquiry
whether
jurors
knew
reason
new
trial
inquiry
revealed
jurors
aware
reason
new
trial
opening
statements
followed
however
defense
counsel
leave
matter
jurors
conjecture
instead
explicitly
stated
hear
testimony
showing
arizona
granted
respondent
new
trial
prosecutor
deliberately
withheld
exculpatory
evidence
defense
following
completion
opening
argument
prosecutor
moved
mistrial
argument
prosecutor
motion
defense
counsel
insisted
evidence
prosecutorial
misconduct
prior
proceeding
admissible
impeachment
purposes
although
offer
authority
support
novel
proposition
indicated
judge
appreciate
opportunity
find
written
law
allow
type
testimony
evidence
supra
trial
judge
remarked
conceive
basis
admission
evidence
tempted
grant
prosecutor
request
immediately
defense
counsel
injection
prosecutorial
misconduct
issue
trial
supra
act
precipitately
rather
proceeding
caution
giving
defense
counsel
benefit
doubt
app
trial
judge
reserved
ruling
admissibility
question
first
denied
mistrial
motion
avoiding
hasty
decision
despite
conviction
evidence
improper
trial
judge
plainly
acting
concern
double
jeopardy
interests
implicated
improvident
mistrial
following
day
prosecutor
renewed
motion
trial
judge
heard
extensive
argument
sides
regarding
propriety
defense
counsel
opening
statement
need
mistrial
defense
counsel
contended
prejudice
might
resulted
references
prosecutorial
misconduct
cured
cautionary
instructions
prosecutor
argued
alternative
inadequate
remove
risk
taint
two
considerations
determinative
add
support
conclusion
first
crowded
calendars
throughout
nation
impose
constant
pressure
judges
finish
business
hand
generally
interest
trial
completed
promptly
possible
interest
frequently
parallels
constitutionally
protected
interest
accused
trial
concluded
particular
tribunal
second
respondent
attempt
demonstrate
specific
prejudice
mistrial
ruling
harm
always
accompanies
retrial
cf
mcneal
hollowell
morris
cas
cc
mass
justice
curtis
held
even
jury
sworn
late
challenge
juror
bias
pointed
neither
party
vested
right
corrupt
prejudiced
juror
fit
sit
judgment
case
wade
hunter
see
nn
accompanying
text
supra
appeals
concerned
trial
judge
may
granted
state
mistrial
motion
comments
defense
counsel
improper
without
considering
possible
impact
comments
impartiality
jurors
think
concern
unwarranted
shortly
defense
counsel
made
first
brief
reference
withholding
evidence
earlier
trial
judge
indicated
concern
regarding
possible
poisoning
panel
addition
sides
argued
question
juror
bias
offered
views
whether
action
short
mistrial
suffice
eliminate
risk
taint
finally
trial
judge
indicated
awareness
grave
consequences
erroneous
mistrial
ruling
unwilling
assume
judge
otherwise
acted
responsibly
deliberately
simply
neglected
consider
one
central
issues
presented
mistrial
motion
argued
parties
made
ruling
justice
white
dissenting
agree
appeals
failure
state
trial
judge
express
legal
standard
declared
mistrial
without
examination
record
sufficient
reason
infer
constitutional
error
foreclosing
second
trial
opinion
townsend
sain
contrary
course
full
scale
exposition
proper
approach
followed
federal
determining
whether
writ
habeas
corpus
issued
petition
state
prisoner
addressed
situation
state
trial
judge
making
challenged
ruling
articulate
constitutional
standard
acted
concluded
coequal
responsibilities
state
federal
judges
administration
federal
constitutional
law
think
district
judge
may
ordinary
case
articulation
properly
assume
state
trier
fact
applied
correct
standards
federal
law
facts
absence
evidence
reason
suspect
incorrect
standard
fact
applied
silent
record
sufficient
basis
concluding
state
judge
committed
constitutional
error
mere
possibility
error
enough
warrant
habeas
corpus
relief
appeals
well
district
therefore
error
granting
relief
without
examination
record
determine
whether
use
incorrect
legal
standard
sufficiently
indicated
something
beyond
mere
silence
whether
declaration
mistrial
appeals
said
normally
inclined
uphold
least
absence
clear
abuse
discretion
constitutionally
vulnerable
however
undertake
examination
record
first
instance
rather
vacate
judgment
appeals
direct
remand
case
district
make
initial
judgment
correct
legal
standard
whether
writ
issue
disagreement
disposition
leads
dissent
justice
marshall
justice
brennan
joins
dissenting
disagreement
majority
narrow
one
fully
concur
view
constitutional
protection
double
jeopardy
clause
embraces
defendant
valued
right
trial
completed
particular
tribunal
since
second
prosecution
inevitably
increases
financial
emotional
burden
accused
prolongs
period
stigmatized
unresolved
accusation
wrongdoing
may
even
enhance
risk
innocent
defendant
may
convicted
ante
omitted
reasons
also
agree
mistrial
declared
defendant
objections
new
trial
permissible
termination
earlier
trial
justified
manifest
necessity
prosecution
must
shoulder
heavy
burden
demonstrating
high
degree
necessity
ante
quarrel
proposition
reviewing
courts
must
accord
substantial
deference
trial
judge
determination
prejudicial
impact
improper
opening
statement
great
leave
alternative
mistrial
secure
ends
public
justice
ante
part
ways
assumption
assessment
prejudicial
impact
improper
argument
ante
sufficient
support
need
mistrial
may
implied
record
courts
found
apparent
face
record
termination
trial
justified
manifest
necessity
means
ends
public
justice
fulfilled
perez
wheat
see
also
ante
defense
counsel
improper
remarks
occupied
one
page
lengthy
opening
statement
despite
fact
prosecutor
vigorously
interrupted
opening
statement
numerous
points
assert
various
objections
made
objection
remarks
formed
basis
mistrial
argument
defense
counsel
visibly
obvious
impact
jurors
uttered
hard
believe
prosecutor
waited
opening
statement
finished
luncheon
recess
concluded
making
objection
known
although
distance
absence
express
findings
impossible
determine
precise
extent
defense
counsel
remarks
may
prejudiced
jury
state
circumstances
set
forth
suggest
prejudice
may
minimal
subject
cure
less
drastic
alternatives
example
jury
instructed
disregard
mention
prior
legal
rulings
irrelevant
issues
hand
consider
evidence
testimony
exhibits
admitted
witnesses
stand
doubt
whether
instructions
alone
suffice
cure
taint
jury
questioned
extent
prejudice
given
anticipated
length
trial
almost
two
weeks
unlikely
jury
appropriately
instructed
first
found
defense
counsel
erred
opening
statement
prejudice
dissipated
deliberations
begin
reasons
impossible
conclude
finding
necessity
implicit
mere
grant
mistrial
majority
concedes
ante
express
determination
evaluation
trial
degree
prejudice
caused
improper
remarks
exploration
possible
alternatives
drastic
solution
declaring
mistrial
indeed
express
indication
face
record
trial
aware
dictates
perez
doctrine
two
days
mistrial
motion
argued
entire
thrust
trial
questions
comments
determine
whether
legal
basis
admitting
evidence
arizona
ruling
prosecution
earlier
trial
suppressed
evidence
exculpatory
respondent
ruling
defense
counsel
adverted
opening
statement
tenor
remarks
throughout
including
statement
declaring
mistrial
suggests
question
considered
admissibility
doubt
trial
exploration
evidentiary
question
conscientious
deliberate
majority
infers
care
trial
must
aware
correct
legal
standard
governing
permissibility
retrials
following
mistrials
must
impliedly
though
expressly
made
requisite
findings
necessity
deliberation
trial
dealt
evidentiary
issue
however
highlights
failure
address
believe
must
key
inquiry
whether
mistrial
abrogation
defendant
constitutionally
protected
interest
completing
trial
particular
tribunal
jorn
plurality
opinion
harlan
wade
hunter
way
secure
public
interest
disposition
charges
propose
constitution
invariably
requires
trial
judge
make
findings
necessity
record
justify
declaration
mistrial
defendant
objections
example
nature
error
one
make
reversal
conviction
appeal
certainty
illinois
somerville
appropriate
finding
may
implied
declaration
mistrial
manifest
necessity
doctrine
require
view
record
make
clear
either
meaningful
practical
alternatives
mistrial
trial
scrupulously
considered
available
alternatives
found
wanting
termination
proceedings
see
jorn
supra
illinois
somerville
supra
marshall
dissenting
record
demonstrated
neither
need
mistrial
plain
obvious
perez
importance
affirmative
indication
trial
made
relevant
findings
apparent
chaos
conducting
trial
welter
administrative
well
legal
concerns
must
occupy
mind
trial
judge
easy
overlook
legal
rule
relevant
factor
rendering
decision
requirement
statement
record
addressed
need
mistrial
ensure
appropriate
consideration
given
efficacy
alternatives
mistrial
decisions
based
upon
improper
partly
adequate
criteria
particular
relevance
moreover
facilitate
proper
appellate
habeas
review
avoiding
need
speculate
basis
decision
terminate
trial
considerations
special
force
mistrial
sought
ground
jury
bias
resulting
trial
counsel
error
trial
uniquely
situated
evaluate
seriousness
prejudice
see
ante
failure
contemporaneously
may
preclude
meaningful
subsequent
determination
whether
mistrial
properly
granted
defendant
objection
thus
necessity
mistrial
manifest
face
record
hold
record
must
clearly
indicate
trial
made
considered
choice
among
available
alternatives
explored
alternatives
record
made
finding
substantial
incurable
prejudice
manifest
necessity
different
case
one
agree
majority
reasoning
result
ambiguous
record
however
absence
finding
indeed
express
indication
trial
applied
doctrine
leaves
open
substantial
possibility
fact
need
terminate
proceedings
high
degree
necessity
required
mistrial
may
properly
granted
reading
record
inconsistent
principle
therefore
affirm
judgment
appeals
proposition
essentially
unremarkable
truism
findings
fact
trial
may
set
aside
appeal
unless
clearly
erroneous
review
appropriate
deference
must
given
trial
opportunity
judge
credibility
witnesses
see
fed
rule
civ
proc
zenith
radio
hazeltine
research
determination
alternative
mistrial
cure
prejudice
created
improper
opening
statement
part
one
law
case
sort
based
primarily
factual
evaluation
extent
particular
jury
prejudiced
contrary
majority
implication
ante
nn
courts
hold
absence
express
findings
relating
necessity
mistrial
dispositive
rather
rulings
district
appeals
based
respective
conclusions
record
independently
determined
jury
prevented
arriving
fair
impartial
verdict
therefore
finding
manifest
necessity
implicit
record
see
app
district
view
prejudice
cured
cautionary
instruction
agree
majority
appeals
applied
inappropriate
standard
review
expressly
recognized
power
discharge
jury
discretionary
trial
absence
clear
abuse
normally
uphold
discretionary
orders
nature
noted
usual
case
trial
judge
observed
event
heard
counsel
made
specific
findings
circumstances
mistrial
declaration
accompanied
finding
jury
longer
render
impartial
verdict
lightly
set
aside
ibid
see
app
recognized
majority
search
implied
finding
prejudice
sufficient
warrant
mistrial
mere
error
either
prosecutor
defense
insufficient
provide
high
degree
necessity
ante
required
permit
retrial
following
grant
mistrial
defendant
objections
see
dinitz
quoting
jorn
plurality
opinion
harlan
mean
suggest
curative
instructions
always
even
generally
sufficient
cure
prejudice
resulting
evidentiary
errors
see
bruton
quoting
krulewitch
jackson
concurring
particularly
error
one
prosecutor
must
shown
harmless
beyond
reasonable
doubt
order
conviction
sustained
see
chapman
california
however
must
recognized
cases
legion
convictions
upheld
despite
jury
exposure
improper
material
relating
defendant
past
conduct
often
curative
instructions
found
sufficient
dispel
prejudice
see
bloom
tuttle
concurring
plante
cert
denied
roland
driver
beasley
app
cert
denied
see
also
hoffman
cert
denied
prosecutor
closing
argument
referring
accused
liar
crook
wheeler
dealer
improper
harmless
error
instructions
may
found
cured
prosecutorial
error
relating
defendant
past
misconduct
beyond
reasonable
doubt
surely
considered
deciding
whether
subject
defendant
second
trial
defense
error
referring
past
misconduct
prosecution
see
tr
voir
dire
defendant
counsel
respect
instant
case
differs
markedly
situation
thompson
discussed
ante
upon
discovery
one
petit
jurors
served
grand
jury
indicating
defendant
trial
immediately
announced
insisted
gentlemen
way
left
discharge
jury
ground
record
defense
counsel
objected
juror
participation
also
objected
discharge
jury
arguing
entitled
acquittal
placed
jeopardy
trial
view
clearly
correct
juror
remained
panel
despite
counsel
objection
conviction
reversed
case
trial
held
jury
discharged
new
jury
impaneled
without
violating
double
jeopardy
clause
affirmed
thus
trial
repeatedly
challenged
defense
counsel
theories
admissibility
arizona
ruling
see
app
refer
manifest
necessity
question
defense
counsel
nature
curative
instructions
might
propounded
otherwise
indicate
consciousness
mere
error
either
side
insufficient
warrant
grant
mistrial
defense
objections
see
supra
based
upon
defense
counsel
remarks
opening
statement
concerning
arizona
opinion
effect
reasons
new
trial
motion
mistrial
granted
app
noted
appeals
circumstances
argument
mistrial
motion
ruling
make
quite
possible
grant
mistrial
based
fact
impropriety
counsel
conduct
established
without
reaching
question
whether
nevertheless
fair
trial
merrill
concurring
majority
relies
three
aspects
record
support
conclusion
trial
make
evaluation
prejudicial
impact
counsel
remarks
need
mistrial
correct
error
ante
first
trial
aware
double
jeopardy
consequences
improvidently
granted
mistrial
namely
defendant
may
tried
true
none
comments
suggests
concern
propriety
anything
ruling
evidentiary
question
see
app
second
majority
points
fact
counsel
argued
whether
prejudice
cured
means
mistrial
argument
occupied
minuscule
portion
side
discussion
elicited
comment
response
finally
notes
voir
dire
jury
trial
expressed
concern
poisoning
panel
allay
concern
jury
questioned
knowledge
reasons
new
trial
transcript
voir
dire
however
suggests
questioning
two
purposes
determine
whether
jurors
knew
second
trial
determine
whether
knowledge
prejudice
deliberations
tr
voir
dire
supra
since
jurors
knew
reason
new
trial
inquiry
made
prejudice
recognized
time
counsel
separate
issue
none
portions
record
establishes
trial
time
made
determination
prejudice
counsel
opening
statement
cured
instruction
basis
voir
dire
make
determination
see
thompson
discussed
ante
supra
although
every
error
require
reversal
upon
conviction
necessitates
mistrial
frequently
high
degree
necessity
required
perez
doctrine
present
may
implied
record
expressed
thereon
error
magnitude
prompts
mistrial
see
illinois
somerville
marshall
dissenting
moreover
given
wide
variety
situations
may
appropriate
grant
mistrial
difficulty
setting
forth
single
standard
provide
meaningful
guidance
occasion
statement
reasons
trial
contribute
development
body
rules
precedents
principles
might
useful
providing
guidance
courts
cf
ex
rel
johnson
chairman
state
bd
parole
vacated
moot
given
importance
respondent
constitutionally
protected
interest
avoiding
unnecessary
second
trials
jorn
might
even
argued
statement
reasons
explicitly
relating
need
mistrial
always
required
go
far
observe
held
numerous
contexts
governmental
decisionmakers
must
state
reasons
decision
particularly
decision
adverse
constitutionally
statutorily
protected
interests
individual
see
morrissey
brewer
goldberg
kelly
simmons
discussed
ante
trial
explained
length
reasons
conclusion
manifest
necessity
mistrial
indeed
even
thompson
discussed
ante
supra
trial
finding
way
respond
grand
juror
presence
petit
jury
sufficiently
indicated
record
exercise
discretion
informed
manifest
necessity
standard