jorn
argued
january
decided
january
appellee
tried
federal
district
information
charging
willfully
assisting
preparation
fraudulent
income
tax
returns
following
impaneling
jury
prosecutor
called
stand
taxpayer
appellee
allegedly
aided
preparing
return
defense
counsel
suggestion
judge
warned
witness
constitutional
rights
witness
expressed
willingness
testify
stating
warned
rights
first
contacted
internal
revenue
service
irs
judge
refused
permit
testify
consulted
attorney
indicating
believe
witness
warned
irs
although
prosecutor
advised
judge
remaining
witnesses
warned
rights
irs
upon
initial
contact
judge
stated
warnings
probably
inadequate
thereupon
discharged
jury
aborted
trial
witnesses
consult
attorneys
case
set
retrial
another
jury
appellee
pretrial
motion
judge
dismissed
information
ground
former
jeopardy
government
filed
direct
appeal
held
judgment
affirmed
pp
affirmed
justice
harlan
joined
chief
justice
justice
douglas
justice
marshall
concluded
sustainment
motion
bar
based
plea
former
jeopardy
appealable
government
long
motion
sustained
prior
impaneling
jury
subsequent
proceeding
motion
made
cf
sisson
pp
fifth
amendment
double
jeopardy
clause
represents
constitutional
policy
finality
defendant
benefit
federal
criminal
proceedings
pp
although
recognized
defendant
reprosecuted
successful
appeal
double
jeopardy
policies
confined
prevention
prosecutorial
judicial
overreaching
pp
defendant
option
case
considered
first
jury
judge
acting
without
defendant
consent
aborts
trial
defendant
deprived
valued
right
trial
completed
particular
tribunal
absence
defendant
motion
mistrial
doctrine
manifest
necessity
perez
wheat
commands
trial
judges
foreclose
defendant
option
scrupulous
exercise
judicial
discretion
warrants
conclusion
justice
served
continuation
trial
pp
judge
must
temper
decision
whether
abort
trial
considering
importance
defendant
able
finally
conclude
confrontation
society
verdict
tribunal
might
believe
favorable
trial
judge
abused
discretion
accordingly
appellee
reprosecution
violate
double
jeopardy
clause
pp
justice
black
justice
brennan
concluded
lacks
jurisdiction
appeal
trial
judge
action
amounted
acquittal
join
judgment
view
decision
majority
reach
merits
pp
stewart
joined
white
blackmun
agree
jurisdiction
appeal
concluded
harlan
see
point
syllabus
supra
richard
stone
argued
cause
reargument
louis
claiborne
argued
cause
original
argument
stone
brief
reargument
solicitor
general
griswold
assistant
attorney
general
walters
brief
original
argument
solicitor
general
griswold
assistant
attorney
general
walters
peter
strauss
joseph
howard
denis
morrill
appointment
reargued
cause
filed
briefs
appellee
justice
harlan
announced
judgment
opinion
joined
chief
justice
justice
douglas
justice
marshall
government
directly
appeals
order
district
district
utah
dismissing
ground
former
jeopardy
information
charging
willfully
assisting
preparation
fraudulent
income
tax
returns
violation
appellee
originally
charged
february
counts
violating
brought
trial
chief
judge
ritter
august
jury
chosen
sworn
counts
dismissed
government
motion
trial
commenced
government
calling
first
witness
internal
revenue
service
agent
order
put
evidence
remaining
allegedly
fraudulent
income
tax
returns
defendant
charged
helping
prepare
trial
judge
suggestion
exhibits
stipulated
introduced
evidence
without
objection
government
five
remaining
witnesses
taxpayers
defendant
allegedly
aided
preparation
returns
first
witnesses
called
prior
commencement
direct
examination
defense
counsel
suggested
witnesses
warned
constitutional
rights
trial
agreed
proceeded
careful
detail
spell
witness
right
say
anything
might
used
subsequent
criminal
prosecution
right
event
prosecution
represented
attorney
first
witness
expressed
willingness
testify
stated
warned
constitutional
rights
internal
revenue
service
first
contacted
trial
judge
indicated
however
believe
witness
given
warning
time
first
contacted
irs
refused
permit
testify
consulted
attorney
trial
judge
asked
prosecuting
attorney
remaining
four
witnesses
similarly
situated
prosecutor
responded
warned
rights
irs
upon
initial
contact
judge
expressing
view
warnings
might
given
probably
inadequate
proceeded
discharge
jury
called
taxpayers
informed
constitutional
rights
considerable
dangers
unwittingly
making
damaging
admissions
factual
circumstances
finally
aborted
trial
witnesses
consult
attorneys
case
set
retrial
another
jury
pretrial
motion
defendant
judge
ritter
dismissed
information
ground
former
jeopardy
government
filed
direct
appeal
noted
probable
jurisdiction
case
argued
term
thereafter
set
reargument
present
term
appellee
contends
threshold
decision
sisson
followed
noting
probable
jurisdiction
case
forecloses
appeal
government
provisions
prior
recent
amendment
question
fully
briefed
argued
reargument
statute
provided
relevant
part
appeal
government
direct
rom
decision
judgment
sustaining
motion
bar
defendant
put
jeopardy
appellee
concedes
indeed
must
prior
rulings
plea
former
jeopardy
constituted
motion
bar
within
meaning
statute
issue
whether
appellee
put
jeopardy
virtue
impaneling
jury
first
proceeding
declaration
mistrial
sisson
supra
opinion
discussing
applicability
provision
government
direct
appeal
trial
judge
actions
concluded
inter
alia
put
jeopardy
language
applied
whenever
jury
impaneled
even
defendant
might
constitutionally
retried
double
jeopardy
provisions
fifth
amendment
jury
first
proceeding
impaneled
mistrial
ruling
appellee
motion
dismiss
grounds
former
jeopardy
made
prior
impaneling
second
jury
government
contends
impaneling
jury
must
understood
apply
jury
proceeding
plea
former
jeopardy
offered
bar
rather
jury
whose
impaneling
first
instance
essential
sustain
plea
merits
appellee
contends
construction
put
statute
sisson
opinion
requires
conclusion
government
may
appeal
jury
prior
proceeding
offense
question
impaneled
think
government
better
argument
opinion
sisson
dealt
problem
presented
trial
judge
order
purporting
arrest
entry
judgment
guilty
verdict
returned
jury
whose
impaneling
claimed
constitute
jeopardy
within
meaning
provision
conclusion
jeopardy
attached
impaneling
jury
proceeding
rested
view
congress
concerned
granting
government
appeal
rights
certain
classes
cases
avoid
subjecting
defendant
second
trial
first
trial
terminated
manner
favorable
defendant
either
jury
verdict
judicial
action
see
sisson
supra
compromise
origins
criminal
appeals
act
see
reflected
concern
concern
important
consideration
supporting
canon
strict
construction
traditionally
applied
statute
see
mistrial
situation
judicial
ruling
chronologically
analogous
sisson
facts
declaration
mistrial
first
jury
impaneled
obviously
government
appealed
judge
ritter
original
declaration
mistrial
since
mistrial
ruling
explicitly
contemplates
reprosecution
defendant
nonappealability
judicial
action
fits
congressional
action
excluding
pleas
abatement
class
cases
warranting
appellate
review
nonappealable
status
rulings
sort
fully
explainable
terms
policy
disfavoring
appeals
interlocutory
rulings
see
discussion
supra
follow
nonappealability
rulings
essentially
interlocutory
insofar
expressly
contemplate
resumption
prosecution
congress
intended
foreclose
governmental
appeal
sustaining
later
motion
bar
trial
judge
conclusion
constitutional
double
jeopardy
policies
require
earlier
mistrial
ruling
accorded
effect
barring
reprosecution
indeed
recall
pleas
former
jeopardy
paradigm
illustrations
motions
bar
common
law
see
supra
seems
much
likely
congressional
decision
allow
governmental
appeals
judge
decision
sustaining
motion
bar
intended
permit
review
later
judicial
action
possibly
premised
erroneous
theories
concerning
constitutional
effects
attaching
earlier
interlocutory
ruling
consistently
opinion
sisson
sustaining
motion
bar
based
plea
former
jeopardy
appealable
long
motion
bar
sustained
prior
impaneling
jury
subsequent
proceeding
since
judge
ritter
case
dismissed
information
appellee
plea
former
jeopardy
prior
impaneling
second
jury
conclude
decision
directly
appealable
government
motion
bar
defendant
put
jeopardy
within
meaning
applicable
statute
hence
proceed
merits
appellee
claim
reprosecution
declaration
mistrial
earlier
proceeding
violate
fifth
amendment
rights
ii
fifth
amendment
prohibition
placing
defendant
twice
jeopardy
represents
constitutional
policy
finality
defendant
benefit
federal
criminal
proceedings
power
government
subject
individual
repeated
prosecutions
offense
cut
deeply
framework
procedural
protections
constitution
establishes
conduct
criminal
trial
society
awareness
heavy
personal
strain
criminal
trial
represents
individual
defendant
manifested
willingness
limit
government
single
criminal
proceeding
vindicate
vital
interest
enforcement
criminal
laws
considerations
expressed
green
noted
policy
underlying
provision
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
considerations
led
conclude
defendant
placed
jeopardy
criminal
proceeding
defendant
put
trial
trier
facts
whether
trier
jury
judge
see
green
supra
wade
hunter
also
true
criminal
trial
even
best
circumstances
complicated
affair
manage
proceedings
dependent
first
instance
elementary
sort
considerations
health
various
witnesses
parties
attorneys
jurors
must
prepared
arrive
set
times
one
adds
scheduling
problems
arising
case
overloads
sixth
amendment
requirement
single
trial
double
jeopardy
provision
restricts
government
conducted
speedily
becomes
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
noted
wade
hunter
supra
defendant
valued
right
trial
completed
particular
tribunal
must
circumstances
subordinated
public
interest
fair
trials
designed
end
judgments
thus
conclusion
jeopardy
attaches
trial
commences
expresses
judgment
constitutional
policies
underpinning
fifth
amendment
guarantee
implicated
point
proceedings
question
remains
however
circumstances
retrial
precluded
initial
proceedings
aborted
prior
verdict
without
defendant
consent
dealing
question
part
explicitly
declined
invitation
litigants
formulate
rules
based
categories
circumstances
permit
preclude
retrial
thus
perez
wheat
held
defendant
capital
case
might
retried
trial
judge
without
defendant
consent
discharged
jury
reported
unable
agree
justice
story
opinion
perez
expressed
following
thoughts
problem
reprosecution
mistrial
declared
without
consent
defendant
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
recent
case
gori
adhering
main
perez
theme
manifest
necessity
standard
appellate
review
suggest
possibility
variation
theme
according
determination
appellate
party
case
beneficiary
mistrial
ruling
gori
called
upon
review
action
trial
judge
discharging
jury
appeared
judge
prosecution
questioning
witness
might
lead
introduction
evidence
prior
crimes
upheld
reprosecution
mistrial
opinion
applying
principle
perez
appears
tie
judgment
abuse
discretion
circumstances
fact
judge
acting
sole
interest
defendant
see
also
dissenting
opinion
justice
douglas
instant
case
government
relying
principally
gori
contends
even
conclude
trial
judge
abused
discretion
reprosecution
permitted
judge
ruling
benefited
defendant
also
clearly
compelled
prosecutorial
conduct
aimed
triggering
mistrial
order
get
another
day
judgment
benefited
mistrial
ruling
turns
appellate
conclusion
concerning
party
trial
judge
point
personal
motivation
trying
protect
prejudice
seems
reasonably
clear
trial
record
judge
insistence
stopping
trial
witnesses
properly
warned
motivated
desire
protect
witnesses
rather
defendant
government
appears
view
question
benefit
turning
appellate
post
hoc
assessment
party
fact
aided
hypothetical
event
witnesses
called
stand
consulting
attorneys
course
conduct
best
serve
insulate
personally
criminal
civil
liability
fraudulent
tax
returns
conception
benefit
however
involves
nothing
exercise
pure
speculation
sum
unable
conclude
record
case
mistrial
made
sole
interest
defendant
see
gori
supra
think
limitation
principle
based
appellate
assessment
side
benefited
mistrial
ruling
adequately
satisfy
policies
underpinning
double
jeopardy
provision
reprosecution
mistrial
unnecessarily
declared
trial
obviously
subjects
defendant
personal
strain
insecurity
regardless
motivation
underlying
trial
judge
action
government
contends
however
policies
evinced
double
jeopardy
provision
reach
sort
injury
rather
unnecessarily
inflicted
second
trial
must
government
view
appear
result
mistrial
declaration
unfairly
aids
prosecution
harasses
defense
govt
brief
certainly
clear
beyond
question
double
jeopardy
clause
guarantee
defendant
government
prepared
circumstances
vindicate
social
interest
law
enforcement
vehicle
single
proceeding
given
offense
thus
example
reprosecution
offense
permitted
defendant
wins
reversal
appeal
conviction
ball
see
green
determination
allow
reprosecution
circumstances
reflects
judgment
defendant
double
jeopardy
interests
however
defined
go
far
compel
society
mobilize
decisionmaking
resources
prepared
assure
defendant
single
proceeding
free
harmful
governmental
judicial
error
also
clear
recognition
defendant
reprosecuted
offense
successful
appeal
compel
conclusion
double
jeopardy
policies
confined
prevention
prosecutorial
judicial
overreaching
crucial
difference
reprosecution
appeal
defendant
reprosecution
sua
sponte
judicial
mistrial
declaration
first
situation
defendant
deprived
option
go
first
jury
perhaps
end
dispute
acquittal
hand
judge
acting
without
defendant
consent
aborts
proceeding
defendant
deprived
valued
right
trial
completed
particular
tribunal
see
wade
hunter
right
go
particular
tribunal
valued
independent
threat
conduct
judge
prosecutor
defendant
significant
interest
decision
whether
take
case
jury
circumstances
occur
might
though
warrant
declaration
mistrial
thus
circumstances
develop
attributable
prosecutorial
judicial
overreaching
motion
defendant
mistrial
ordinarily
assumed
remove
barrier
reprosecution
even
defendant
motion
necessitated
prosecutorial
judicial
error
absence
motion
perez
doctrine
manifest
necessity
stands
command
trial
judges
foreclose
defendant
option
scrupulous
exercise
judicial
discretion
leads
conclusion
ends
public
justice
served
continuation
proceedings
see
perez
conscious
refusal
channel
exercise
discretion
according
rules
based
categories
circumstances
see
wade
hunter
reflects
elusive
nature
problem
presented
judicial
action
foreclosing
defendant
going
jury
discretion
must
still
exercised
unquestionably
important
factor
considered
need
hold
litigants
sides
standards
responsible
professional
conduct
clash
adversary
criminal
process
yet
evolve
rules
based
source
particular
problem
giving
rise
question
whether
mistrial
declared
even
circumstances
problem
reflects
error
part
one
counsel
trial
judge
must
still
take
care
assure
situation
warrants
action
part
foreclosing
defendant
potentially
favorable
judgment
tribunal
sum
counsel
sides
perform
imperfect
world
area
rules
based
either
source
problem
intended
beneficiary
ruling
disserve
vital
competing
interests
government
defendant
trial
judge
must
recognize
lack
preparedness
government
continue
trial
directly
implicates
policies
underpinning
double
jeopardy
provision
speedy
trial
guarantee
cf
downum
alternatively
judge
must
bear
mind
potential
risks
abuse
defendant
society
unwillingness
unnecessarily
subject
repeated
prosecutions
yet
final
analysis
judge
must
always
temper
decision
whether
abort
trial
considering
importance
defendant
able
conclude
confrontation
society
verdict
tribunal
might
believe
favorably
disposed
fate
iii
applying
considerations
record
case
must
conclude
trial
judge
abused
discretion
discharging
jury
despite
assurances
first
witness
prosecuting
attorney
five
taxpayers
involved
litigation
warned
constitutional
rights
judge
refused
permit
testify
first
expressing
disbelief
warned
expressing
views
warnings
might
given
inadequate
app
probing
assumed
inadequacy
warnings
might
given
prosecutor
asked
really
intended
try
case
willfully
aiding
preparation
fraudulent
returns
theory
incriminate
taxpayers
prosecutor
started
answer
intended
judge
cut
midstream
immediately
discharged
jury
app
apparent
record
consideration
given
possibility
trial
continuance
indeed
trial
judge
acted
abruptly
discharging
jury
prosecutor
disposed
suggest
continuance
defendant
object
discharge
jury
opportunity
one
examines
circumstances
surrounding
discharge
jury
seems
abundantly
apparent
trial
judge
made
effort
exercise
sound
discretion
assure
taking
circumstances
account
manifest
necessity
sua
sponte
declaration
mistrial
perez
therefore
must
conclude
circumstances
case
appellee
reprosecution
violate
double
jeopardy
provision
fifth
amendment
affirmed
footnotes
equivalent
motion
bar
used
raise
defenses
prior
acquittal
prior
conviction
pardon
see
murdock
whether
provision
construed
broadly
reach
plea
effect
preventing
prosecutions
see
mersky
brennan
concurring
narrowly
reach
pleas
nature
confession
avoidance
see
stewart
dissenting
appellee
plea
former
jeopardy
based
prior
declaration
mistrial
included
cf
blue
see
generally
sisson
portion
opinion
sisson
discussion
joined
four
members
justice
white
dissenting
opinion
contended
jeopardy
language
applies
preclude
governmental
appeal
defendant
reprosecution
barred
constitution
government
relies
part
tateo
oppenheimer
sustaining
jurisdiction
review
trial
action
granting
pretrial
motion
dismiss
double
jeopardy
grounds
prior
proceeding
ended
mistrial
tateo
however
jurisdiction
neither
raised
parties
considered
therefore
little
significance
jurisdiction
point
oppenheimer
motion
bar
second
proceeding
rested
earlier
pretrial
motion
based
statute
limitations
theory
second
plea
res
judicata
appellee
points
rule
federal
rules
criminal
procedure
permits
defendant
raise
defense
former
jeopardy
motion
impaneling
jury
see
notes
advisory
committee
moore
federal
practice
ed
thus
suggested
defendant
may
deprive
government
appeal
simply
delaying
motion
dismiss
jury
impaneled
problem
course
inherent
structure
criminal
appeals
act
prior
amendment
example
defendant
rule
may
also
delay
statute
limitations
plea
impaneling
jury
see
thereby
depriving
government
appeal
soon
passage
original
act
attorney
general
recognized
problem
proposed
act
amended
require
counsel
defendant
raise
argue
questions
jeopardy
attaches
see
sisson
supra
recently
enacted
amendment
criminal
appeals
act
undertakes
deal
problem
allowing
government
appeal
appeals
decision
judgment
order
district
dismissing
indictment
information
one
counts
except
appeal
shall
lie
double
jeopardy
clause
constitution
prohibits
prosecution
omnibus
crime
control
act
stat
january
however
amendment
applicable
criminal
case
begun
district
effective
date
amendment
see
also
pp
clear
record
case
judge
ritter
action
two
members
suggest
classified
acquittal
purposes
jurisdiction
appeal
first
judge
ritter
action
original
trial
clearly
contemplated
reprosecution
defendant
witnesses
consulted
attorneys
see
app
justice
stewart
dissent
post
judge
ritter
subsequent
action
dismissing
information
simply
put
ground
defendant
plea
former
jeopardy
without
explanation
app
parties
put
question
former
jeopardy
judge
ritter
exclusively
terms
line
cases
concerning
reprosecutability
mistrial
declarations
without
defendant
consent
see
app
contain
entire
proceedings
judge
ritter
course
noted
sisson
supra
trial
judge
characterization
action
control
classification
action
purposes
appellate
jurisdiction
sisson
goes
articulate
criterion
acquittal
purposes
assessing
jurisdiction
review
trial
judge
disposition
acquittal
legal
determination
basis
facts
adduced
trial
relating
general
issue
case
sisson
supra
record
case
utterly
devoid
indication
reliance
judge
ritter
facts
relating
general
issue
case
thereby
surely
distinguishing
case
sisson
one
think
reasoning
sisson
compelling
conclusion
whatever
else
judge
ritter
may
done
acquit
defendant
relevant
sense
two
terms
ago
double
jeopardy
provision
fifth
amendment
made
directly
applicable
see
benton
maryland
see
also
annotation
double
jeopardy
mistrial
sigler
double
jeopardy
see
annotation
supra
sigler
supra
think
nothing
said
tateo
properly
taken
indicating
contrary
view
even
though
defendant
guilty
plea
aborted
trial
subsequently
held
coerced
judicial
action
defendant
nonetheless
foreclosed
option
go
jury
chose
thereafter
rely
proceedings
redress
wrong
done
judge
words
question
voluntariness
purposes
assessing
validity
plea
guilty
whether
offered
trial
must
distinguished
question
voluntariness
purposes
assessing
reprosecutability
double
jeopardy
clause
conversely
defendant
mistrial
motion
necessitated
judicial
prosecutorial
impropriety
designed
avoid
acquittal
reprosecution
might
well
barred
cf
tateo
supra
supra
chief
justice
burger
concurring
join
plurality
opinion
judgment
without
reluctance
however
since
case
represents
plain
frustration
right
case
tried
attributable
solely
conduct
trial
judge
accused
brought
erroneous
mistrial
ruling
different
case
record
shows
nothing
take
appellee
claims
outside
classic
mold
twice
placed
jeopardy
offense
justice
black
justice
brennan
believe
lacks
jurisdiction
appeal
action
trial
judge
amounted
acquittal
appellee
therefore
discretion
left
trial
judge
put
appellee
jeopardy
however
view
decision
majority
reach
merits
join
judgment
justice
stewart
justice
white
justice
blackmun
join
dissenting
plurality
opinion
today
says
whenever
trial
judge
criminal
case
abused
discretion
declaring
mistrial
motion
constitutional
guarantee
double
jeopardy
categorically
operates
forestall
trial
case
merits
agree
district
judge
decision
declare
mistrial
case
based
belief
prosecution
witnesses
testify
submitted
false
income
tax
returns
prepared
defendant
adequately
warned
might
incur
criminal
liability
testimony
judge
apparently
intended
simply
postpone
case
witnesses
fully
apprised
constitutional
rights
second
trial
scheduled
new
jury
however
new
trial
date
defendant
filed
motion
dismiss
information
ground
former
jeopardy
judge
granted
motion
government
appealed
directly
course
common
ground
many
circumstances
trial
judge
may
discharge
jury
order
new
trial
without
encountering
double
jeopardy
problems
one
example
judge
acts
instance
defendant
see
tateo
another
jury
reach
verdict
trial
judge
may
proceed
initiative
even
active
objection
defendant
declare
mistrial
perez
wheat
cf
simmons
wade
hunter
hand
situations
circumstances
mistrial
declared
may
bar
future
prosecution
one
example
judge
exercises
authority
help
prosecution
trial
case
going
badly
affording
another
favorable
opportunity
convict
accused
gori
suppose
whether
misconduct
kind
occurs
instance
prosecutor
trial
judge
sole
initiative
question
guarantee
double
jeopardy
make
another
trial
impermissible
present
case
fall
neatly
conventional
categories
request
mistrial
defense
counsel
although
suggestion
witnesses
warned
constitutional
rights
may
triggered
course
events
followed
case
certainly
analogized
hung
jury
conversely
mistrial
requested
prosecutor
slightest
indication
desired
occur
suggestion
situation
involving
harassment
attempt
judge
prosecutor
enhance
possibility
conviction
second
trial
plurality
opinion
purports
resolve
matter
adopting
rule
abuse
discretion
trial
judge
standard
said
derive
statement
leading
case
perez
supra
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
case
trial
judge
discharged
jury
first
day
trial
taking
action
apparently
forestall
prejudicial
error
inferring
prosecuting
attorney
line
questioning
presaged
inquiry
calculated
inform
jury
crimes
accused
appeals
held
declaration
mistrial
circumstances
prevent
new
trial
merits
defendant
way
harmed
brief
trial
indeed
revealed
prosecution
entire
case
thus
position
start
anew
clean
slate
possibility
prejudice
eliminated
foreknowledge
case
situation
quite
unlike
troublesome
problems
found
various
cases
prosecution
desires
strengthen
case
new
start
otherwise
provokes
declaration
mistrial
acted
prejudice
accused
accused
actually
subject
two
trials
essentially
offense
hand
defendant
receive
absolution
crime
later
proven
quite
completely
judge
acted
hastily
interest
injustice
public
particular
case
disastrous
precedent
future
suffice
unwilling
clearly
appears
mistrial
granted
sole
interest
defendant
hold
necessary
consequence
bar
retrial
hark
back
formalistic
artificialities
seventeenth
century
criminal
procedure
confine
federal
trial
courts
compelling
navigate
narrow
compass
scylla
charybdis
thus
make
unduly
hesitant
conscientiously
exercise
sensitive
judgment
according
lights
immediate
exigencies
trial
effective
protection
criminal
accused
applying
considerations
record
case
seems
clear
trial
merits
violate
constitutional
guarantee
quite
true
plurality
opinion
insists
mistrial
declared
benefit
witnesses
rather
sole
interest
defendant
except
inconvenience
delay
always
caused
mistrial
judge
ruling
possibly
injured
defendant
witnesses
heeded
trial
judge
advice
least
possible
defendant
position
might
substantially
improved
refusal
testify
upon
grounds
guarantee
compulsory
line
questioning
resulted
mistrial
may
initiated
defense
counsel
result
mind
course
showing
intent
part
either
prosecutor
judge
harass
defendant
enhance
chances
conviction
second
trial
gori
defense
given
complete
preview
government
case
even
assuming
trial
judge
action
plainly
improper
standard
good
trial
practice
circumstances
mistrial
declared
involve
abuse
kind
invoke
constitutional
guarantee
double
jeopardy
respectfully
dissent
judgment
trial
judge
stated
case
vacated
setting
vacated
afternoon
calendared
calendared
going
witnesses
talk
permit
testify
app
agree
jurisdiction
appeal
reasons
set
part
plurality
opinion
downum
contrary
plurality
opinion
today
points
case
recognized
lack
preparedness
government
continue
trial
directly
implicates
policies
underpinning
double
jeopardy
provision
speedy
trial
guarantee
ante
failure
prosecution
go
forward
case
expeditious
orderly
manner
quite
different
even
serious
error
trial
procedure
presiding
judge
course
well
settled
jury
verdict
reversed
appeal
error
trial
judge
new
trial
permitted
forman
bryan
tateo
held
retrial
barred
double
jeopardy
clause
first
trial
terminated
plea
guilty
coerced
clearly
improper
statements
trial
judge
proceedings