Johnson v. United States
District of Columbia Court of Appeals
1Opinion of the Court
STEADMAN, Associate Judge:
On the second day of jury deliberations in appellant’s first trial on a ten-count indictment, the trial court declared a mistrial, over the defendant’s objection, on grounds of “manifest necessity.” Before us is an expedited interlocutory appeal from a trial court ruling, prior to commencement of a second trial, denying appellant’s motion to dismiss the charges on double jeopardy grounds. 1 We hold that under the circumstances of this case, the trial court in the first trial did not abuse its discretion in declaring a mistrial for manifest necessity. Accordingly, we…
2Cases cited19 opinions
- Abney v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1977
- Arizona v. WashingtonSupreme Court of the United States · 1978
- United States v. PerezSupreme Court of the United States · 1824
- Richardson v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1984
- Hansford P. Miller v. Jackson AviromCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 1967
14 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by10 opinions
- Salmon v. United StatesDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 1997
- Butler v. United StatesDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 2005
- Crawford v. United StatesDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 2007
- Davidson v. United StatesDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 2012
- Nero v. District of ColumbiaDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 2007
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.