Legal Opinion

Commonwealth v. Balog

Supreme Court of Pennsylvania

Decided June 19, 1990No. 1224PublishedCited by 13 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

DEL SOLE, Judge:

In this case we are asked to decide whether the trial court abused its discretion when it ordered a mistrial, over defense counsel’s objections, as a result of Appellant/Defendant’s statement that his co-conspirator had been found not guilty in an earlier trial. Because we find that there was no “manifest necessity” to order a mistrial, we reverse the trial court’s denial of Appellant’s motion to dismiss, and order the instant action dismissed on the basis that Appellant’s re-prosecution would violate the Double Jeopardy provisions of the United States and Pennsylvania…

2Cases cited25 opinions

  1. Green v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1957
  2. United States v. JornSupreme Court of the United States · 1971
  3. United States v. PerezSupreme Court of the United States · 1824
  4. United States v. WilsonSupreme Court of the United States · 1975
  5. Commonwealth v. BoldenSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1977

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

3Cited by13 opinions

  1. Commonwealth v. McCordSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1997
  2. Commonwealth v. RiveraSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1998
  3. State v. YazzieNew Mexico Court of Appeals · 2010
  4. In the Interest of MorrowSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1990
  5. Commonwealth v. PhillippiSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1995

8 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