Legal Opinion

State v. Baker

Court of Appeals of Maryland

Decided May 22, 2017No. 55/16Published

1Opinion of the Court

State of Maryland v. Andrew Daniel Baker, No. 55, September Term, 2016. Opinion by Getty, J. CRIMINAL LAW & PROCEDURE — FIFTH AMENDMENT — DOUBLE JEOPARDY — MANIFEST NECESSITY Trial court abused its discretion by declaring sua sponte mistrial over defendant’s objection after learning that State’s key witness, who was refusing to testify, was represented in a related pending criminal case by the prosecutor’s brother, a public defender. Mistrial was not supported by manifest necessity where trial court failed to consider, on the record, whether reasonable alternatives to a mistrial existed and…

2Cases cited26 opinions

  1. Benton v. MarylandSupreme Court of the United States · 1969
  2. Kastigar v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1972
  3. United States v. JornSupreme Court of the United States · 1971
  4. Arizona v. WashingtonSupreme Court of the United States · 1978
  5. United States v. PerezSupreme Court of the United States · 1824

21 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