Legal Opinion

Commonwealth v. Scott

Kentucky Supreme Court

Decided February 24, 2000No. 98-SC-0764-DGPublishedCited by 23 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

LAMBERT, Chief Justice.

After jeopardy has attached in a criminal trial, a mistrial may not be declared unless there is a manifest necessity. For reasons of perceived hostility from a juror, the Commonwealth sought and was granted a mistrial. The Court of Appeals reversed the subsequent conviction on former jeopardy grounds, and the Commonwealth sought review in this Court, contending that the manifest necessity standard has been met, and that the Court of Appeals’ conclusion to the contrary was erroneous.

The issue here arose as follows. At Lashawndrick Scott’s first trial, during Officer…

2Cases cited15 opinions

  1. United States v. PerezSupreme Court of the United States · 1824
  2. Downum v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1963
  3. Trowel v. CommonwealthKentucky Supreme Court · 1977
  4. John Glover v. Norris W. McMackin WardenCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1991
  5. Grimes v. McAnultyKentucky Supreme Court · 1997

10 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by23 opinions

  1. Cardine v. CommonwealthKentucky Supreme Court · 2009
  2. Dunlap v. CommonwealthKentucky Supreme Court · 2013
  3. Radford v. LovelaceKentucky Supreme Court · 2006
  4. Parker v. CommonwealthKentucky Supreme Court · 2007
  5. Commonwealth v. PadgettMissouri Court of Appeals · 2018

18 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API