Already have an account? Sign in instead.
You stay signed in for 30 days on this browser.
Continue with Google Continue with MicrosoftNo account yet? Create a free one.
We sent a six-digit code.
It expires in ten minutes, works once, and only in this browser. Five wrong tries void it. Send another code.
Your account is live and the Cloudflare checks are off for this browser.
8 canonical passages across 7 cases, quoted by 28 opinions in total. These passages cluster together because the same opinions keep quoting them side by side: they state parts of one doctrine. The anchor passage is from People v. Mehall.
| # | Case | Flag | Canonical passage | Citers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | People v. Mehall Anchor | green | “if the trial is concluded prematurely, a retrial for that offense is prohibited unless the defendant consented to the interruption or a mistrial was declared because of a manifest necessity.” | 7 |
| 2 | People v. Lett | green | “not whether this court would have found manifest necessity, but whether the trial court abused its discretion in finding manifest necessity.” | 3 |
| 3 | Ross v. Petro | green | “determining whether manifest necessity exists to justify the declaration of a mistrial requires a balancing of competing concerns: the defendant's interest in completing his trial in a single proceeding before a particular tribunal versus the strength of the justification for a …” | 3 |
| 4 | People v. Anglin | green | “in dealing with cases of alleged juror disqualification or misconduct discovered after the jury has been impaneled, our supreme court has pointed out that the trial judge who has conducted an investigation is better able to judge the question of disqualification because he 'saw …” | 3 |
| 5 | People v. Hicks | green | “determining whether manifest necessity exists to justify the declaration of a mistrial requires a balancing of competing concerns: the defendant's interest in completing his trial in a single proceeding before a particular tribunal versus the strength of the justification for a …” | 3 |
| 6 | People v. Hicks | green | “failure to consider alternatives precludes a determination that manifest necessity justified its declaration of a mistrial” | 3 |
| 7 | People v. Benton | green | “before ordering a mistrial, the court must, on the record, give each defendant and the prosecutor an opportunity to comment on the propriety of the order, to state whether that party consents or objects, and to suggest alternatives.” | 3 |
| 8 | People v. Parker | green | “appellate courts will not interfere with the action of trial courts in discharging juries, where facts are found upon which such action can be based. but the facts must be found and placed upon the record.” | 3 |
A red or yellow flag on a member means the underlying case has negative treatment: for those, check the case page before relying on the passage.