Trial court's manifest-necessity determination was erroneous because trial court failed to provide any meaningful consideration of alternatives to mistrial; thus, retrying defendant would violate Double Jeopardy Clause.
To continue reading, please subscribe.
For only $95 a month (the price of 2 article purchases)
Receive unlimited article access and full access to our archives,
Daily Appellate Report, award winning columns, and our
Verdicts and Settlements.
Or
$795 for an entire year!
For only $95 a month (the price of 2 article purchases)
Receive unlimited article access and full access to our archives,
Daily Appellate Report, award winning columns, and our
Verdicts and Settlements.
Or
$795 for an entire year!
Already a subscriber?
Sign In
Enewsletter Sign-up
Related Content
U.S. Supreme Court, Government
High court decision is a game changer for land use litigation
Jul. 24, 2019
By Derek P. Cole
By Derek P. Cole
