Legal Opinion · Concurrence

Sneed v. Burress

Kentucky Supreme Court

Decided October 20, 2016No. 2015-SC-000169-MRPublished

1ConcurrenceHughes, J.

I agree completely with the Court’s conclusion that the declaration of a mistrial in this case was not an abuse .of the trial court’s discretion. I write separately in hopes that a fuller account of the trial court’s proceedings and this Court’s standard of review will serve as a response to the concerns raised by the dissent.

RELEVANT FACTS

Near the outset of her opening statement, counsel for Sneed explained to the jury that the defendant denied the sex-offense allegations that had been leveled against him and contended that the alleged victim, the defendant’s granddaughter, had fabricated…

2Cases cited15 opinions

  1. Brady v. MarylandSupreme Court of the United States · 1963
  2. Arizona v. WashingtonSupreme Court of the United States · 1978
  3. United States v. PerezSupreme Court of the United States · 1824
  4. United States v. DinitzSupreme Court of the United States · 1976
  5. Commonwealth v. BarrosoKentucky Supreme Court · 2003

10 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