renico
warden
lett
argued
march
decided
may
jury
selection
jury
instructions
michigan
respondent
lett
first
trial
inter
alia
murder
took
less
nine
hours
approximately
four
hours
deliberations
jury
sent
trial
seven
notes
including
one
asking
happen
jury
agree
judge
called
jury
attorneys
courtroom
questioned
foreperson
said
jury
unable
reach
unanimous
verdict
judge
declared
mistrial
dismissed
jury
scheduled
new
trial
lett
second
trial
deliberating
hours
minutes
new
jury
found
guilty
murder
appeal
lett
argued
judge
first
trial
announced
mistrial
without
manifest
necessity
double
jeopardy
clause
barred
state
trying
second
time
agreeing
michigan
appeals
reversed
conviction
michigan
reversed
concluded
perez
wheat
defendant
may
retried
following
discharge
deadlocked
jury
long
trial
exercised
sound
discretion
concluding
jury
deadlocked
thus
manifest
necessity
mistrial
arizona
washington
appellate
must
generally
defer
trial
judge
determination
deadlock
reached
found
judge
lett
first
trial
abused
discretion
declaring
mistrial
observing
jury
deliberated
sufficient
amount
time
following
short
noncomplex
trial
jury
sent
several
notes
including
one
appearing
indicate
heated
discussions
foreperson
stated
jury
reach
verdict
lett
federal
habeas
petition
contended
michigan
rejection
double
jeopardy
claim
unreasonable
application
clearly
established
federal
law
determined
thus
barred
antiterrorism
effective
death
penalty
act
aedpa
obtaining
federal
habeas
relief
district
granted
writ
sixth
circuit
affirmed
held
michigan
decision
case
unreasonable
aedpa
sixth
circuit
erred
granting
lett
habeas
relief
pp
question
aedpa
whether
michigan
determination
unreasonable
application
clearly
established
federal
law
whether
incorrect
application
law
see
williams
taylor
aedpa
imposes
highly
deferential
standard
evaluating
rulings
lindh
murphy
demands
given
benefit
doubt
woodford
visciotti
per
curiam
pp
clearly
established
federal
law
largely
undisputed
judge
discharges
jury
grounds
jury
reach
verdict
double
jeopardy
clause
bar
new
trial
defendant
new
jury
perez
trial
judges
may
declare
mistrial
opinion
taking
circumstances
consideration
manifest
necessity
high
degree
necessity
washington
supra
decision
whether
grant
mistrial
reserved
broad
discretion
trial
judge
illinois
somerville
discretion
declare
mistrial
deadlocked
jury
accorded
great
deference
reviewing
washington
supra
although
deference
absolute
expressly
declined
require
mechanical
application
rigid
formula
wade
hunter
trial
judge
decides
declare
mistrial
due
jury
deadlock
explicitly
held
judge
required
make
explicit
findings
manifest
necessity
articulate
record
factors
informing
discretion
washington
supra
never
required
judge
circumstances
force
jury
deliberate
minimum
period
time
question
jurors
individually
consult
counsel
issue
supplemental
jury
instruction
consider
means
breaking
impasse
moreover
legal
standard
applied
michigan
general
one
whether
abuse
broad
discretion
reserved
trial
judge
somerville
supra
aedpa
authorizes
federal
grant
relief
state
application
federal
law
unreasonable
follows
general
rule
issue
thus
greater
potential
reasoned
disagreement
among
judges
leeway
state
courts
reaching
outcomes
determinations
yarborough
alvarado
pp
michigan
adjudication
involved
straightforward
application
longstanding
precedents
facts
lett
case
state
cited
double
jeopardy
cases
perez
washington
applying
precedents
particular
facts
finding
abuse
discretion
light
length
deliberations
following
short
uncomplicated
trial
jury
notes
judge
fact
foreperson
stated
jury
reach
verdict
thus
reasonable
determine
trial
judge
exercised
sound
discretion
declaring
mistrial
sixth
circuit
concluded
otherwise
disagreed
inferences
michigan
drawn
facts
circuit
interpretation
implausible
reasonable
interpretations
record
also
possible
objectively
unreasonable
michigan
conclude
trial
judge
exercise
discretion
sound
light
happened
trial
fact
relevant
legal
standard
general
one
plainly
correct
incorrect
answer
case
yarborough
supra
sixth
circuit
failed
grant
michigan
courts
dual
layers
deference
required
aedpa
double
jeopardy
precedents
pp
sixth
circuit
also
erred
relying
fulton
moore
decision
proposition
arizona
washington
sets
forth
three
specific
factors
determine
whether
judge
exercised
sound
discretion
fulton
constitute
clearly
established
federal
law
determined
failure
apply
independently
authorize
habeas
relief
aedpa
fulton
understood
merely
illuminate
decision
washington
washington
set
forth
test
determine
whether
trial
judge
exercised
sound
discretion
declaring
mistrial
pp
deny
trial
judge
case
thorough
declaring
mistrial
nonetheless
steps
sixth
circuit
thought
taken
required
either
double
jeopardy
precedents
extension
aedpa
pp
fed
appx
reversed
remanded
roberts
delivered
opinion
scalia
kennedy
thomas
ginsburg
alito
joined
stevens
filed
dissenting
opinion
sotomayor
joined
breyer
joined
parts
ii
paul
renico
warden
petitioner
reginald
lett
writ
certiorari
appeals
sixth
circuit
may
chief
justice
roberts
delivered
opinion
case
requires
us
review
grant
writ
habeas
corpus
state
prisoner
antiterrorism
effective
death
penalty
act
aedpa
district
case
issued
writ
respondent
reginald
lett
ground
michigan
murder
conviction
violated
double
jeopardy
clause
constitution
appeals
sixth
circuit
affirmed
however
courts
misapplied
aedpa
deferential
standard
review
conclude
michigan
application
federal
law
unreasonable
reverse
august
argument
broke
detroit
liquor
store
antagonists
included
adesoji
latona
taxi
driver
charles
jones
passenger
claimed
wrongfully
ejected
latona
cab
reginald
lett
friend
jones
argument
began
lett
left
liquor
store
retrieved
handgun
another
friend
outside
parking
lot
returned
store
shot
latona
twice
head
chest
latona
died
wounds
shortly
thereafter
see
people
lett
michigan
prosecutors
charged
lett
murder
possession
firearm
commission
felony
trial
took
place
june
jury
selection
jury
instructions
trial
took
less
nine
hours
spread
six
different
days
jury
deliberations
began
june
ran
day
resuming
work
next
morning
jury
sent
trial
note
one
seven
sent
two
days
deliberations
stating
jurors
concern
voice
levels
disturbing
proceedings
might
going
later
jury
sent
another
note
asking
ca
agree
istrial
etrial
hat
trial
transcript
reveal
whether
judge
discussed
jury
query
counsel
record
upon
receiving
last
communication
clear
judge
called
jury
back
courtroom
along
prosecutor
defense
counsel
jury
seated
following
exchange
took
place
received
note
asking
ca
agree
conclude
situation
time
like
ask
foreperson
identify
please
foreperson
identified
okay
thank
right
need
ask
jury
deadlocked
words
disagreement
verdict
foreperson
yes
right
believe
hopelessly
deadlocked
foreperson
majority
us
believe
interposing
say
going
say
okay
foreperson
oh
sorry
want
know
verdict
might
split
thank
okay
going
reach
unanimous
verdict
foreperson
response
yes
foreperson
judge
tr
recorder
detroit
pp
judge
declared
mistrial
dismissed
jury
scheduled
new
trial
later
year
neither
prosecutor
lett
attorney
made
objection
lett
second
trial
held
different
judge
jury
november
time
jury
able
reach
unanimous
verdict
lett
guilty
murder
deliberating
hours
minutes
lett
supra
lett
appealed
conviction
michigan
appeals
argued
judge
first
trial
announced
mistrial
without
manifest
necessity
mistrial
error
lett
maintained
state
barred
double
jeopardy
clause
constitution
trying
second
time
michigan
appeals
agreed
lett
reversed
conviction
state
appealed
michigan
reversed
appeals
explained
decision
perez
wheat
defendant
may
retried
following
discharge
deadlocked
jury
even
discharge
occurs
without
defendant
consent
lett
double
jeopardy
clause
violation
circumstances
noted
long
trial
exercised
concluding
jury
deadlocked
thus
mistrial
ibid
quoting
perez
supra
emphasis
deleted
observed
decision
arizona
washington
appellate
must
generally
defer
trial
judge
determination
deadlock
reached
setting
forth
applicable
law
michigan
determined
judge
lett
first
trial
abused
discretion
declaring
mistrial
cited
facts
jury
deliberated
least
four
hours
following
relatively
short
far
complex
trial
jury
sent
several
notes
including
one
appears
indicate
discussions
may
particularly
heated
ost
important
jury
foreperson
expressly
stated
jury
going
reach
verdict
ibid
lett
petitioned
federal
writ
habeas
corpus
argued
trial
declaration
mistrial
constituted
abuse
discretion
manifest
necessity
cut
short
jury
deliberations
contended
michigan
rejection
double
jeopardy
claim
amounted
unreasonable
application
clearly
established
federal
law
determined
thus
barred
aedpa
obtaining
federal
habeas
relief
district
agreed
granted
writ
supp
ed
appeal
divided
panel
appeals
sixth
circuit
affirmed
fed
appx
state
petitioned
review
granted
certiorari
ii
important
outset
define
question
us
question
whether
trial
judge
declared
mistrial
even
whether
abuse
discretion
done
applicable
standard
direct
review
question
aedpa
instead
whether
determination
michigan
abuse
discretion
unreasonable
application
clearly
established
federal
law
explained
unreasonable
application
federal
law
different
incorrect
application
federal
law
williams
taylor
indeed
federal
habeas
may
issue
writ
simply
concludes
independent
judgment
relevant
decision
applied
clearly
established
federal
law
erroneously
incorrectly
rather
application
must
objectively
unreasonable
distinction
creates
substantially
higher
threshold
obtaining
relief
de
novo
review
schriro
landrigan
aedpa
thus
imposes
highly
deferential
standard
evaluating
rulings
lindh
murphy
demands
decisions
given
benefit
doubt
woodford
visciotti
per
curiam
clearly
established
federal
law
area
largely
undisputed
perez
held
judge
discharges
jury
grounds
jury
reach
verdict
double
jeopardy
clause
bar
new
trial
defendant
new
jury
explained
trial
judges
may
declare
mistrial
whenever
opinion
taking
circumstances
consideration
manifest
necessity
decision
declare
mistrial
left
sound
discretion
judge
power
used
greatest
caution
urgent
circumstances
plain
obvious
causes
ibid
since
perez
clarified
manifest
necessity
standard
interpreted
literally
mistrial
appropriate
necessity
washington
supra
decision
whether
grant
mistrial
reserved
broad
discretion
trial
judge
point
consistently
reiterated
decisions
illinois
somerville
see
also
gori
particular
trial
judge
decision
declare
mistrial
considers
jury
deadlocked
accorded
great
deference
reviewing
washington
mistrial
premised
upon
trial
judge
belief
jury
unable
reach
verdict
long
considered
classic
basis
proper
mistrial
see
also
downum
deadlocked
jury
classic
example
state
may
try
defendant
twice
reasons
allowing
trial
judge
exercise
broad
discretion
especially
compelling
cases
involving
potentially
deadlocked
jury
washington
justification
deference
trial
best
position
assess
factors
must
considered
making
necessarily
discretionary
determination
whether
jury
able
reach
verdict
continues
deliberate
absence
deference
trial
judges
might
otherwise
employ
coercive
means
break
apparent
deadlock
thereby
creating
significant
risk
verdict
may
result
pressures
inherent
situation
rather
considered
judgment
jurors
say
grant
absolute
deference
trial
judges
context
perez
noted
judge
exercise
discretion
must
sound
made
clear
record
reveals
trial
judge
failed
exercise
discretion
entrusted
reason
deference
appellate
disappears
washington
thus
trial
judge
acts
reasons
completely
unrelated
trial
problem
purports
basis
mistrial
ruling
close
appellate
scrutiny
appropriate
ibid
similarly
trial
judge
acts
irrationally
irresponsibly
action
condoned
citing
jorn
somerville
supra
expressly
declined
require
mechanical
application
rigid
formula
trial
judges
decide
whether
jury
deadlock
warrants
mistrial
wade
hunter
also
explicitly
held
trial
judge
declaring
mistrial
required
make
explicit
findings
articulate
record
factors
informed
deliberate
exercise
discretion
washington
supra
never
required
trial
judge
declaring
mistrial
based
jury
deadlock
force
jury
deliberate
minimum
period
time
question
jurors
individually
consult
obtain
consent
either
prosecutor
defense
counsel
issue
supplemental
jury
instruction
consider
means
breaking
impasse
rehnquist
noted
never
overturned
trial
declaration
mistrial
jury
unable
reach
verdict
ground
necessity
standard
met
winston
moore
opinion
dissenting
denial
certiorari
remains
true
today
nearly
years
later
legal
standard
applied
michigan
case
whether
abuse
broad
discretion
reserved
trial
judge
somerville
supra
washington
supra
type
general
standard
triggers
another
consideration
aedpa
assessing
whether
state
application
federal
law
unreasonable
range
reasonable
judgment
depend
part
nature
relevant
rule
state
must
apply
yarborough
alvarado
aedpa
authorizes
federal
courts
grant
relief
state
courts
act
unreasonably
follows
general
rule
issue
thus
greater
potential
reasoned
disagreement
among
judges
leeway
state
courts
reaching
outcomes
determinations
ibid
see
also
knowles
mirzayance
slip
iii
light
foregoing
michigan
decision
case
unreasonable
aedpa
decision
appeals
grant
lett
writ
habeas
corpus
must
reversed
michigan
adjudication
involved
straightforward
application
longstanding
precedents
facts
lett
case
cited
double
jeopardy
cases
perez
washington
elaborating
upon
manifest
necessity
standard
granting
mistrial
noting
broad
deference
appellate
courts
must
give
trial
judges
deciding
whether
standard
met
given
case
lett
applied
precedents
particular
facts
found
abuse
discretion
especially
light
length
deliberations
short
uncomplicated
trial
jury
notes
suggesting
heated
discussions
asking
happen
ca
agree
ost
important
fact
jury
foreperson
expressly
stated
jury
going
reach
verdict
circumstances
reasonable
michigan
determine
trial
judge
exercised
sound
discretion
declaring
mistrial
appeals
sixth
circuit
concluded
otherwise
contest
michigan
description
objective
facts
disagreed
inferences
drawn
example
speculated
trial
judge
may
misinterpreted
jury
notes
signs
discord
deadlock
read
literally
expressly
stated
thing
fed
determined
judge
brief
colloquy
foreperson
may
wrongly
implied
false
equivalence
mere
disagreement
genuine
deadlock
may
given
rise
inappropriate
pressure
say
jury
unable
reach
verdict
trial
judge
mistakes
egregious
appeals
view
michigan
opinion
finding
abuse
discretion
wrong
objectively
unreasonable
appeals
interpretation
trial
record
implausible
matter
inventive
surely
crude
speculation
dissent
post
jury
deliberated
four
hours
notes
arguably
ambiguous
trial
judge
initial
question
foreperson
imprecise
judge
neither
asked
elaboration
foreperson
answers
took
measures
confirm
foreperson
prediction
unanimous
verdict
reasonable
interpretations
record
also
possible
lett
trial
complex
reason
jury
necessarily
needed
hours
deliberate
guilt
notes
jury
sent
judge
certainly
read
reflecting
substantial
disagreement
even
say
outright
important
foreperson
expressly
told
judge
response
unambiguous
question
going
reach
unanimous
verdict
jury
unable
agree
lett
supra
given
foregoing
facts
michigan
decision
upholding
trial
judge
exercise
discretion
necessarily
correct
objectively
number
plausible
ways
interpret
record
lett
trial
standard
applied
michigan
whether
judge
exercised
sound
discretion
general
one
plainly
correct
incorrect
answer
case
yarborough
see
also
knowles
supra
slip
appeals
ruling
lett
favor
failed
grant
michigan
courts
dual
layers
deference
required
aedpa
double
jeopardy
precedents
appeals
also
erred
second
respect
relied
upon
decision
fulton
moore
proposition
arizona
washington
sets
forth
three
factors
determine
whether
judge
exercised
sound
discretion
declaring
mistrial
whether
judge
heard
opinions
parties
counsel
propriety
mistrial
considered
alternatives
mistrial
acted
deliberately
instead
abruptly
fed
cited
fulton
interpretation
washington
buttress
conclusion
michigan
erred
concluding
trial
judge
exercised
sound
discretion
fed
fulton
decision
however
constitute
clearly
established
federal
law
determined
failure
apply
decision
independently
authorize
habeas
relief
aedpa
dissent
suggests
fulton
understood
merely
illuminat
washington
post
washington
nowhere
established
three
factors
constitutional
test
determine
whether
trial
judge
exercised
sound
discretion
declaring
mistrial
fed
concluding
lett
entitled
writ
habeas
corpus
deny
trial
judge
thorough
declaring
mistrial
appeals
pointed
asked
foreperson
additional
followup
questions
granted
additional
time
deliberations
consulted
prosecutor
defense
counsel
acting
steps
appropriate
circumstances
none
however
required
either
double
jeopardy
precedents
extension
aedpa
aedpa
prevents
defendants
federal
courts
using
federal
habeas
corpus
review
vehicle
reasonable
decisions
state
courts
whether
michigan
opinion
reinstating
lett
conviction
case
correct
clearly
unreasonable
judgment
appeals
reversed
case
remanded
proceedings
consistent
opinion
ordered
paul
renico
warden
petitioner
reginald
lett
writ
certiorari
appeals
sixth
circuit
may
justice
stevens
justice
sotomayor
joins
justice
breyer
joins
parts
ii
dissenting
common
law
courts
went
great
lengths
ensure
jury
reached
verdict
english
judges
reportedly
loaded
hung
juries
oxcarts
carried
town
town
judgment
less
enterprising
colleagues
kept
jurors
de
facto
prisoners
achieved
notion
mistrial
based
jury
deadlock
appear
blackstone
commentaries
surprise
colonial
juries
virtually
always
returned
well
even
century
american
judges
continued
coax
unresolved
juries
toward
consensus
threatening
deprive
lock
room
prolonged
period
mercifully
legal
system
evolved
harsh
measures
longer
tolerated
yet
history
demonstrates
changed
respect
owed
defendant
valued
right
trial
completed
particular
tribunal
wade
hunter
longstanding
doctrine
applying
double
jeopardy
clause
attests
durability
fundamentality
interest
reasons
right
merits
constitutional
protection
worthy
repetition
arizona
washington
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
footnotes
omitted
underlying
idea
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
green
come
years
recognize
jury
coercion
poses
serious
threat
jurors
defendants
alike
accused
interest
single
proceeding
must
sometimes
yield
public
interest
fair
trials
designed
end
judgments
wade
therefore
carved
exceptions
rule
exceptions
narrow
mistrial
granted
prosecutor
request
prosecutor
must
shoulder
burden
justifying
mistrial
avoid
double
jeopardy
bar
burden
heavy
one
washington
judge
acts
sua
sponte
declaring
mistrial
must
similarly
make
sure
must
enable
reviewing
confirm
deprive
defendant
valued
right
ibid
case
trial
judge
meet
burden
record
suggests
discharged
jury
without
considering
less
extreme
courses
action
record
makes
quite
clear
fully
appreciate
scope
significance
ancient
right
stake
michigan
decision
rejecting
reginald
lett
double
jeopardy
claim
clearly
error
one
disputes
genuinely
deadlocked
jury
classic
basis
declaring
mistrial
declaration
doctrine
preclude
reprosecution
disputed
case
whether
trial
judge
took
adequate
care
ensure
jury
genuinely
deadlocked
long
line
precedents
establishes
governing
legal
principle
williams
taylor
resolving
question
although
acknowledges
precedents
ante
minimizes
heavy
burden
placed
trial
courts
fountainhead
decision
perez
wheat
illinois
somerville
writing
unanimous
justice
story
articulated
manifest
necessity
standard
continues
govern
double
jeopardy
analysis
mistrial
orders
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
capital
cases
especially
courts
extremely
careful
interfere
chances
life
favour
prisoner
right
order
discharge
security
public
faithful
sound
conscientious
exercise
discretion
rests
cases
upon
responsibility
judges
oaths
office
perez
wheat
passage
worthy
repetition
perez
struck
careful
balance
established
authority
trial
judges
discharge
jury
prior
verdict
recognition
novelty
potential
injustice
practice
subjected
authority
several
constraints
judge
may
declare
mistrial
unless
manifest
necessity
act
ends
public
justice
require
determining
whether
conditions
exist
judge
must
exercise
sound
discretion
conscientious
ness
greatest
caution
reserving
discharge
power
urgent
circumstances
plain
obvious
causes
ibid
exact
circumstances
causes
meet
bar
declined
specify
recognizing
trial
proceedings
may
raise
innumerable
complications
impossible
define
advance
possible
grounds
interfere
nce
set
forth
general
standards
judicial
conduct
rather
categorical
rules
specific
classes
situations
ibid
seeds
entire
jurisprudence
permissibility
retrial
following
initial
mistrial
packed
one
passage
later
courts
fleshed
perez
without
making
significant
innovations
additions
justice
story
formulation
quoted
provide
guidance
decision
wide
variety
cases
washington
consistently
adhered
subsequent
decisions
somerville
thus
repeatedly
reaffirmed
power
discharge
jury
prior
verdict
reserved
extraordinary
striking
circumstances
downum
internal
quotation
marks
omitted
trial
judge
may
take
weighty
step
somerville
unless
scrupulous
ly
assessed
situation
take
care
assure
warrants
action
part
foreclosing
defendant
potentially
favorable
judgment
tribunal
jorn
plurality
opinion
exercise
sound
discretion
judge
may
act
irrationally
irresponsibly
precipitately
must
instead
act
deliberately
careful
ly
washington
view
elusive
nature
problem
mechanical
rules
substitute
double
jeopardy
mistrial
context
sensitive
application
general
standards
jorn
plurality
opinion
governing
legal
principles
area
principles
application
particular
set
facts
entails
element
judgment
emphasizes
also
repeatedly
reaffirmed
trial
judges
considerable
leeway
determining
whether
jury
deadlocked
bound
use
specific
procedures
make
specific
findings
reviewing
courts
must
accord
broad
deference
decisions
ante
reviewing
still
important
role
play
application
deference
course
end
inquiry
washington
order
ensure
defendant
constitutional
interest
adequately
protected
reviewing
courts
obligation
satisfy
words
justice
story
trial
judge
exercised
discretion
declaring
mistrial
ibid
record
reveals
trial
judge
failed
exercise
discretion
entrusted
reason
deference
appellate
disappears
trial
judges
need
follow
precise
regimen
facilitate
appellate
review
must
least
take
care
ensure
basis
mistrial
order
adequately
disclosed
record
precedents
contain
examples
judicial
action
sides
line
instance
allowed
second
trial
jurors
first
trial
hours
deliberation
announced
open
unable
agree
specific
traversable
fact
called
deadlock
question
logan
likewise
permitted
reprosecution
initial
judge
heard
extended
argument
parties
mistrial
motion
acted
evident
concern
possible
double
jeopardy
consequences
erroneous
ruling
accorded
careful
consideration
defendant
interest
trial
concluded
single
proceeding
washington
hand
barred
retrial
first
judge
acted
abruptly
cutting
prosecutor
midstream
discharging
jury
without
giving
parties
opportunity
object
jorn
plurality
opinion
see
also
somerville
characterizing
jorn
judge
actions
erratic
opined
trial
judges
considerable
leeway
deciding
whether
discharge
jury
resolve
doubt
favor
liberty
citizen
rather
exercise
unlimited
uncertain
arbitrary
judicial
discretion
downum
internal
quotation
marks
omitted
ii
accurately
describes
events
leading
trial
judge
declaration
mistrial
ante
glides
quickly
number
details
taken
together
show
decisionmaking
neither
careful
well
considered
manifest
necessity
sound
discretion
standards
force
must
demand
trial
courts
probably
fair
say
trial
especially
complex
ante
neither
trivial
affair
lett
charged
serious
crimes
murder
well
possession
firearm
commission
felony
faced
potential
sentence
life
imprisonment
convicted
seventeen
witnesses
provided
testimony
course
calendar
days
see
supp
ed
see
also
discussing
piecemeal
fashion
evidence
presented
jury
jury
first
period
deliberation
thursday
afternoon
lasted
less
minutes
jury
likely
spent
brief
session
little
electing
foreperson
people
lett
cavanagh
dissenting
jury
deliberated
hours
friday
morning
prior
discharge
time
sent
trial
seven
notes
inconsequential
routine
queries
first
note
friday
morning
raised
concern
jurors
voice
levels
letter
mccowan
clerk
mar
nothing
record
relates
concern
substance
tenor
discussion
jury
sent
fateful
missive
asking
ca
agree
istrial
etrial
hat
ibid
seconds
later
still
jury
sent
another
note
lunch
ibid
trial
judge
initiated
colloquy
foreperson
concluded
mistrial
declaration
see
ante
reproducing
transcript
colloquy
even
accounting
imprecision
oral
communication
judge
made
inordinate
number
logical
legal
missteps
short
exchange
cf
somerville
critiquing
erratic
mistrial
inquiry
take
much
exegetical
skill
spot
judge
began
stating
received
note
asking
ca
agree
conclude
situation
time
ante
sion
non
sequitur
note
asked
happen
jury
agree
gave
indication
jury
already
reached
irrevocable
impasse
judge
ignored
request
information
note
actually
contained
instead
announced
deadlock
jury
time
thereby
prejudging
question
ostensibly
summoned
foreperson
probe
namely
whether
jury
fact
deadlocked
judge
continued
need
ask
jury
deadlocked
words
disagreement
verdict
ante
federal
appeals
observed
question
improperly
conflated
deadlock
mere
disagreement
fed
appx
deadlock
condition
situation
impossible
proceed
act
complete
standstill
oxford
english
dictionary
ed
disagreement
among
jurors
perfectly
normal
come
close
approaching
imperious
necessity
required
discharge
downum
trial
judge
modulated
inquiry
believe
jury
hopelessly
deadlocked
ante
foreperson
midst
replying
majority
us
believe
judge
appears
cut
ibid
one
fault
trial
judge
wanting
preserve
secrecy
jury
deliberations
supp
two
aspects
foreperson
truncated
reply
notable
first
tends
show
foreperson
feel
prepared
declare
definitively
jury
hopelessly
deadlocked
ibid
prepared
hard
see
begin
response
descriptive
account
viewpoint
second
foreperson
reply
suggests
jury
may
leaning
toward
acquittal
admittedly
crude
speculation
entirely
possible
foreperson
process
saying
majority
us
believe
guilty
majority
us
believe
sufficient
evidence
prove
one
counts
retrial
lett
convicted
counts
possibilities
submit
linguistically
probable
something
like
following
majority
us
believe
lett
guilty
whereas
minority
us
believe
hopelessly
deadlocked
matter
logically
far
probable
something
along
lines
majority
us
believe
ever
able
reach
verdict
foreperson
given
opportunity
poll
colleagues
point
yet
implausible
endings
supported
conclusion
manifestly
necessary
discharge
judge
steered
conversation
back
issue
deadlock
asking
going
reach
unanimous
verdict
ante
foreperson
hesitated
judge
persisted
ibid
foreperson
replied
judge
ibid
two
aspects
interchange
also
notable
first
judge
question
though
direct
actually
rather
ambiguous
gave
foreperson
temporal
legal
context
within
understand
asked
supp
foreperson
easily
thought
judge
meant
going
reach
unanimous
verdict
next
hour
lunch
recess
end
day
ibid
emphasis
deleted
even
foreperson
assumed
time
constraint
easily
thought
judge
meant
estimation
likely
reach
unanimous
verdict
affirmative
answer
question
likewise
fall
far
short
manifest
necessity
second
foreperson
hesitation
suggests
lack
confidence
position
alone
called
question
propriety
mistrial
order
judge
bore
demanded
unqualified
answer
time
worry
judicial
coercion
juries
worry
judges
pressuring
manner
keep
deliberating
return
verdict
may
otherwise
chosen
judge
exerted
pressure
prevent
jury
reaching
verdict
cut
deliberations
well
point
clear
longer
fruitful
recall
prior
summoning
foreperson
colloquy
trial
judge
gave
opportunity
consult
jurors
matter
discussed
foreperson
solid
basis
estimating
likelihood
deadlock
recall
well
almost
immediately
sending
judge
note
asking
happen
disagreed
jury
sent
note
asking
lunch
plainly
group
prepared
go
work
judge
declared
mistrial
spot
entire
exchange
foreperson
took
three
minutes
app
pet
cert
entire
jury
deliberations
took
roughly
four
hours
judge
gave
parties
opportunity
comment
foreperson
remarks
much
less
question
mistrial
cf
washington
trial
judge
gave
defense
counsel
prosecutor
full
opportunity
explain
positions
propriety
mistrial
fed
rule
crim
proc
ordering
mistrial
must
give
defendant
government
opportunity
comment
propriety
order
state
whether
party
consents
objects
suggest
alternatives
soon
judge
declared
mistrial
set
new
pretrial
date
discharged
jury
concluded
proceedings
everyone
free
take
weekend
app
pet
cert
addition
remarkable
hast
washington
inexplicabl
abrupt
ness
fed
acted
remarkable
trial
judge
never
trial
judge
consider
alternatives
otherwise
provide
evidence
exercised
sound
discretion
example
judge
poll
jurors
give
instruction
ordering
deliberations
query
defense
counsel
thoughts
continued
deliberations
indicate
record
mistrial
declaration
necessary
lett
cavanagh
dissenting
judge
invite
argument
input
prosecutor
make
findings
fact
provide
statements
illuminating
thought
process
follow
foreperson
final
response
give
evident
consideration
ends
public
justice
balance
defendant
rights
state
interests
manner
discharge
decision
made
contravened
standard
judge
may
constitutional
obligation
take
one
aforementioned
measures
obligation
exercise
sound
discretion
thus
assure
er
self
situation
warrant
ed
action
er
part
foreclosing
defendant
potentially
favorable
judgment
tribunal
jorn
plurality
opinion
add
factors
fail
see
trial
judge
exercised
anything
resembling
sound
discretion
declaring
mistrial
defined
term
indeed
fail
see
record
disclose
much
less
evidence
sound
decisionmaking
within
realm
realistic
nonpretextual
possibilities
mistrial
declaration
precipitate
one
liable
find
despite
multitude
cases
involving
mistrials
arisen
years
neither
petitioner
able
identify
abrupt
judicial
action
upheld
see
tr
oral
arg
even
prosecutor
felt
compelled
acknowledge
trial
decision
discharge
jury
error
fed
quoting
postconviction
hearing
transcript
michigan
contrary
conclusion
unreasonable
suggested
abuse
discretion
found
result
palpably
grossly
violative
fact
logic
evidences
exercise
perversity
exercise
judgment
defiance
thereof
lett
quoting
waterbury
headers
finding
record
case
provides
sufficient
justification
mistrial
declaration
lett
concluded
declaration
constituted
permissible
exercise
judicial
discretion
listed
without
explaining
several
reasons
conclusion
jury
deliberated
least
four
hours
following
relatively
short
far
complex
trial
sent
several
notes
course
deliberations
including
one
appears
indicate
discussions
may
particularly
heated
parties
object
mistrial
order
ost
important
jury
foreperson
expressly
stated
jury
going
reach
verdict
ibid
see
ante
reprising
list
reasons
suffice
justify
mistrial
order
four
hours
long
time
jury
deliberations
particularly
murder
case
indeed
remarkable
jurors
review
testimony
witnesses
time
given
let
alone
conclude
deadlocked
supp
jury
note
pertaining
volume
level
necessarily
indicate
anything
heated
ness
lett
discussion
suggestion
record
case
trial
judge
draw
conclusion
supp
although
preferable
lett
tried
lodge
objection
defense
counsel
given
meaningful
opportunity
judge
discharged
jury
simultaneously
mistrial
order
counsel
received
advance
notice
either
action
may
even
informed
content
jury
notes
see
ante
fed
point
actual
declaration
mistrial
even
mentioned
record
potential
course
action
summary
nature
trial
actions
rendered
objection
unlikely
meaningless
internal
quotation
marks
omitted
counsel
failure
object
therefore
legally
detailed
foreperson
remarks
far
equivocal
ambiguous
context
michigan
allowed
michigan
defense
trial
actions
thus
weak
terms
collapses
entirely
weight
many
defects
trial
process
virtually
either
overlooked
discounted
unreasonableness
michigan
decision
highlighted
decisions
three
courts
addressed
lett
double
jeopardy
claim
ruled
favor
well
dissent
filed
two
michigan
justices
opinion
state
prosecutor
decision
unfortunately
compounds
deleterious
consequences
michigan
ruling
although
trial
judge
decision
entitled
great
deference
place
reviewing
extract
factoids
record
attempt
salvage
bad
decision
supp
iii
really
try
vindicate
michigan
merits
instead
ascribes
today
outcome
antiterrorism
effective
death
penalty
act
aedpa
foregoing
analysis
shows
michigan
ruling
saved
however
construed
ruling
incorrect
also
unreasonable
fair
measure
three
particular
facets
aedpa
analysis
require
brief
comment
first
fact
substantive
legal
standard
applied
state
general
one
bearing
standard
review
ante
said
general
rule
leeway
courts
reaching
outcomes
determinations
yarborough
alvarado
statement
stands
unremarkable
proposition
broadly
framed
rules
tend
encompass
broader
set
conforming
applications
regardless
nature
legal
principle
issue
task
federal
remains
determine
whether
state
decision
contrary
involved
unreasonable
application
clearly
established
federal
law
general
standards
less
binding
law
discrete
second
agree
federal
appeals
erred
rel
ying
upon
decision
applying
arizona
washington
ante
sixth
circuit
well
aware
decision
constitute
established
federal
law
determined
ante
quoting
panel
expressly
stated
review
ed
michigan
decision
determine
whether
objectively
unreasonable
light
holdings
fed
panel
examined
precedents
relevant
clearly
established
federal
law
aedpa
tool
illuminating
precise
contours
law
lower
courts
routinely
look
circuit
cases
provide
evidence
precedents
ha
clearly
established
rule
particular
time
shed
light
state
courts
application
existing
precedents
hertz
liebman
federal
habeas
corpus
practice
procedure
ed
hereinafter
hertz
liebman
healthy
practice
indeed
vital
practice
considering
cases
decides
never
disapproved
finally
agree
aedpa
authorizes
dual
layers
deference
utilized
case
ante
little
doubt
aedpa
directs
federal
courts
attend
every
judgment
utmost
care
williams
opinion
stevens
statute
never
uses
term
deference
legislative
history
makes
clear
congress
meant
preserve
robust
review
see
also
hertz
liebman
summarizing
congressional
record
noting
aspect
prior
practice
troubled
aedpa
supporters
federal
inattention
lack
respect
state
decisions
federal
looked
find
legally
correct
attempt
prevent
federal
courts
exercising
independent
review
habeas
applications
radical
reform
dubious
constitutionality
congress
spoken
much
greater
clarity
intent
williams
opinion
stevens
two
levels
absolutely
necessary
us
decide
whether
michigan
decision
right
wrong
ante
federal
judge
firmly
convinced
decision
wrong
view
statutory
duty
uphold
might
also
constitutional
obligation
reverse
regardless
one
conceptualizes
distinction
incorrect
unreasonable
ruling
one
must
always
determine
whether
ruling
wrong
able
test
magnitude
error
substantive
methodological
considerations
compel
federal
courts
give
habeas
claims
full
independent
review
decide
even
aedpa
escaping
burden
judgment
case
reginald
lett
constitutional
rights
violated
trial
terminated
first
trial
without
adequate
justification
subsequently
prosecuted
offense
majority
appear
dispute
point
nevertheless
denies
lett
relief
applying
level
deference
state
ruling
effectively
effaces
role
federal
courts
nothing
one
find
code
reports
requires
us
turn
blind
eye
manifestly
unlawful
conviction
respectfully
dissent
footnotes
dissent
correctly
points
aedpa
never
uses
term
post
opinion
stevens
cases
done
describe
effect
threshold
restrictions
granting
federal
habeas
relief
state
prisoners
see
wellons
hall
per
curiam
slip
smith
spisak
slip
mcdaniel
brown
per
curiam
slip
cone
bell
slip
knowles
mirzayance
slip
waddington
sarausad
slip
think
reasonable
however
contend
foreperson
solid
basis
estimating
likelihood
deadlock
post
participated
jury
deliberations
necessary
us
decide
whether
michigan
decision
matter
trial
judge
declaration
mistrial
right
wrong
latter
question
particular
close
one
lett
points
hearing
michigan
appeals
state
prosecutor
expressed
view
judge
fact
erred
dismissing
jury
declaring
mistrial
michigan
declined
accept
confession
error
people
lett
event
reasons
explained
whether
trial
judge
right
wrong
pertinent
question
aedpa
footnotes
comment
deadlocked
juries
dynamite
critical
look
allen
charge
chi
rev
citing
crabb
history
english
law
see
king
ledgingham
vent
eng
hale
pleas
crown
baker
introduction
english
legal
history
ed
see
also
holdsworth
history
english
law
rev
ed
evidence
sides
closed
blackstone
observed
criminal
cases
jury
discharged
till
given
verdict
commentaries
laws
england
see
thomas
greenbaum
justice
story
cuts
gordian
knot
hung
jury
instructions
wm
mary
bill
rights
according
scholars
first
report
mistrial
failure
reach
verdict
american
ibid
see
mead
richland
center
see
commonwealth
moore
see
cole
swan
greene
iowa
see
canterberry
commonwealth
justice
harlan
observed
power
government
subject
individual
repeated
prosecutions
offense
cut
deeply
framework
procedural
protections
constitution
establishes
conduct
criminal
trial
jorn
plurality
opinion
see
also
gori
perez
authoritative
starting
point
law
field
see
also
jorn
final
analysis
judge
must
always
temper
decision
whether
abort
trial
considering
importance
defendant
able
conclude
confrontation
society
verdict
tribunal
might
believe
favorably
disposed
fate
jorn
technically
plurality
opinion
relevant
respects
majority
product
justices
black
brennan
believed
lacked
jurisdiction
appeal
reason
withheld
full
assent
statement
concurring
judgment
however
view
decision
majority
reach
merits
join
ed
judgment
ibid
petitioner
acknowledges
jorn
broke
new
ground
holding
consistent
broader
perez
reply
brief
petitioner
see
brief
petitioner
recognizing
constitutional
floor
accord
arizona
washington
illinois
somerville
downum
gori
another
reading
foreperson
reply
available
statement
majority
us
believe
may
complete
sentence
words
may
meant
convey
majority
us
believe
hopelessly
deadlocked
transcript
places
em
dash
rather
period
word
hardly
dispositive
evidence
intonation
intent
however
trial
judge
contemporaneous
reaction
fact
foreperson
permitted
consult
jurors
issue
deadlock
respondent
failure
advance
reading
undercut
plausibility
see
aba
standards
criminal
justice
discovery
trial
jury
pp
ed
trial
judge
able
send
jury
back
deliberations
notwithstanding
indication
unable
agree
general
view
may
send
jury
back
additional
deliberations
even
though
jury
indicated
twice
several
times
agree
even
jurors
requested
discharged
believed
jury
permitted
avoid
reasonable
period
deliberation
merely
repeated
indications
unhappy
inability
agree
federal
judicial
center
manual
recurring
problems
criminal
trials
ed
declaring
mistrial
trial
judge
must
consider
procedural
alternatives
mistrial
finding
none
adequate
make
finding
manifest
necessity
declaration
mistrial
national
conference
state
trial
judges
judicial
administration
division
american
bar
association
national
judicial
college
judge
book
ed
jury
given
full
opportunity
decide
case
considering
number
days
evidence
heard
state
justice
institute
national
center
state
courts
national
judicial
college
jury
trial
management
century
module
online
http
visited
apr
available
clerk
case
file
jurors
offered
assistance
apparent
impasse
like
trial
michigan
make
factual
findings
bolster
unreasonable
legal
conclusion
state
appeals
noted
trial
judge
declared
mistrial
soon
extracted
suggestive
answer
foreperson
never
even
found
record
jury
genuinely
deadlocked
people
lett
wl
apr
per
curiam
see
also
people
lett
trial
articulate
rationale
record
michigan
expressly
declined
commit
position
jury
really
deadlocked
manifest
necessity
really
exist
see
issue
whether
found
manifest
necessity
accordingly
even
apply
appeal
determination
factual
issue
made
state
presum
correct
event
none
relevant
facts
case
disputed
argument
concerning
properly
raised
passed
upon
see
jorn
plurality
opinion
ndeed
trial
judge
acted
abruptly
discharging
jury
defendant
disposed
object
discharge
jury
opportunity
see
also
lett
wl
noting
failure
object
jury
discharge
constitute
consent
michigan
law
defendant
affirmative
request
consent
mistrial
may
relevant
double
jeopardy
inquiry
see
jorn
plurality
opinion
never
suggested
defendants
must
object
orders
preserve
claim
much
less
object
order
issued
sua
sponte
without
advance
notice
recognition
basic
insight
precedents
made
clear
decision
may
unreasonable
within
meaning
state
misapplied
legal
principle
set
facts
different
case
principle
announced
wiggins
smith
quoting
lockyer
andrade
see
also
williams
taylor
critical
feature
aedpa
jurisprudence
federal
habeas
review
meaningless
relief
granted
required
perfect
congruence
facts
gave
rise
governing
precedents
facts
confronted
state
particular
case