Legal Opinion

Tritt v. State

Court of Appeals of Alaska

Decided January 4, 2008No. A-9600PublishedCited by 5 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

OPINION

STEWART, Judge.

Shortly after the parties completed opening statements in Cordell Tritt's jury trial, the trial court indicated that it would offer the State the option of a mistrial because the court believed that Tritt's opening statement was unfair. The prosecutor chose the court's option of a mistrial over Tritt's objection.

Tritt moved to dismiss the case on the ground that a retrial would violate the double jeopardy clause. The superior court denied the motion to dismiss. Tritt petitioned this court for review, and we granted review. Because we conclude that there was no manifest…

2Cases cited11 opinions

  1. Arizona v. WashingtonSupreme Court of the United States · 1978
  2. Frink v. StateAlaska Supreme Court · 1979
  3. Amidon v. StateAlaska Supreme Court · 1977
  4. March v. StateCourt of Appeals of Alaska · 1993
  5. Walker v. StateAlaska Supreme Court · 1982

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

3Cited by5 opinions

  1. Adam Charles Dere v. State of AlaskaCourt of Appeals of Alaska · 2019
  2. Allen v. StateCourt of Appeals of Alaska · 2016
  3. Hewitt v. StateCourt of Appeals of Alaska · 2008
  4. Tallon Westlake v. State of AlaskaCourt of Appeals of Alaska · 2026
  5. Westlake v. StateCourt of Appeals of Alaska · 2026

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

Powered by the Exa API