Nathan Brock v. State of Indiana

SULLIVAN, Justice.

The defendant’s first trial ended in a mistrial due to improper prejudicial comments made by defense counsel during closing argument. We hold that, although the defendant did not consent to the mistrial, his second trial did not violate the Double Jeopardy Clause of the Fifth Amendment because the trial court did not abuse its discretion in concluding that a mistrial was justified by manifest necessity-

Background

The defendant, Nathan Brock, was classified as a habitual traffic violator (“HTV”) by the Bureau of Motor Vehicles (“BMV”) and his Indiana driver’s license was…