Clancy v. State

In Everett Clancy's appeal from his manslaughter conviction, §13A-6-3, Ala. Code 1975, he contends that the prosecution was barred on double-jeopardy grounds and that the trial court erred when it denied his motion to dismiss the case. The majority holds that the prosecution was not barred. I believe that Clancy is entitled to relief on his claim; therefore, I dissent.

During Clancy's first trial, near the end of the defense's case, the State requested that a mistrial be declared. The prosecutor argued that its motion for a mistrial was due to be granted on grounds that several defense…