31:
274:
alternative courses - (1) a stay or recess pending application to the Court of
Appeals to review the propriety of expelling Wagner, (2) continuation of the trial with prior counsel, or (3) a declaration of a mistrial which would permit the respondent to obtain other counsel. Following the short recess, Meldon moved for a mistrial stating that the Dinitz had reviewed the alternatives and believed that mistrial would be in his best interest. Mistrial was granted without opposition.
269:. The jury was selected and sworn, and opening statements by counsel began. In the defense's opening statements, Wagner gave improper personal opinions regarding the prosecution's key witness and case. The prosecutor objected, and the judge warned Wagner not to do it again. The judge found it necessary to twice more remind Wagner of the purpose of the opening statement and to instruct him to relate, "the facts that you expect the evidence to show, the admissible evidence."
303:"the State, with all its resources and power, should not be allowed to make repeated attempts to convict an individual for an alleged offense, thereby subjecting him to embarrassment, expense and ordeal and compelling him to live in a continuing state of anxiety and insecurity, as well as enhancing the possibility that, even though innocent, he may be found guilty."
328:
protects a defendant against bad-faith conduct on part of the prosecutor or judge intended to provoke mistrial requests, and thereby, subject defendant to the substantial burdens imposed by multiple prosecutions. But here the judge's banishment of Wagner from the proceedings was not done in bad faith
273:
at 603. Wagner, however, continued to present improper arguments. The judge then excluded Wagner from the trial and ordered him to leave the courthouse. The judge asked Meldon, Dinitz's original defense counsel, if he was ready to proceed with trial or whether he would be willing to seek one of three
320:
for the mistrial, or the ends of public justice would otherwise be defeated. A motion by the defendant for mistrial is ordinarily assumed to remove any barrier to retrial, absent bad faith on part of the prosecutor of judge. This is because the defendant has a choice to take the chance to go to the
286:
of the
Constitution. The motion was denied. The appellate court took the view that the exclusion of Wagner and the questioning of Meldon left no choice but to move for mistrial. On that basis, the court concluded that the request for mistrial should be ignored and treated as though mistrial was
264:
Nathan Dinitz was charged with narcotics offenses in violation of 84 Stat. 1260, 1265, 21 U.S.C. §§ 841(a)(1), 846. Five days before trial, Dinitz retained new lawyer, Wagner, for his defense. Wagner had not been admitted to practice in that court, but on the first day of the trial, the court
299:
The Double
Jeopardy Clause of the Fifth Amendment protects a defendant in a criminal proceeding against multiple punishments or repeated prosecutions for the same offense. Underlying this constitutional safeguard is the belief that:
115:
Where a mistrial was granted with the defendant's consent in the absence of bad faith on part of the prosecution or the judge, there is no violation of double jeopardy when the defendant is put on retrial.
435:
1262:
321:
first jury and end the dispute, then and there, with an acquittal. The important consideration is whether the defendant retained primary control over the course to be followed in the event of error.
356:
1257:
402:
379:
341:
72:
427:
351:
103:
479:
329:
to goad Dinitz into requesting a mistrial or prejudice his changes of an acquittal. Wagner was guilty of improper conduct, which may have justified disciplinary action.
249:
230:
470:
482:
332:
Therefore, the
Supreme Court held that the Court of Appeals erred in finding the retrial violated Dinitz's constitutional right not to be twice put in jeopardy.
1252:
346:
1247:
951:
463:
316:, there can be a new trial after a mistrial has been declared without the defendant's request or consent depends on whether there is a
245:
35:
496:
1100:
696:
876:
456:
763:
900:
833:
597:
640:
1188:
1116:
525:
1000:
664:
541:
1108:
967:
916:
1156:
1012:
1148:
908:
852:
731:
723:
656:
557:
448:
648:
1132:
1076:
782:
755:
747:
680:
621:
613:
578:
422:
325:
313:
308:
288:
283:
282:
Before the retrial, Dinitz moved to dismiss the indictment on the ground that a retrial would violate the
138:
1180:
1052:
1020:
892:
790:
509:
431:
406:
383:
64:
1036:
943:
814:
1172:
1140:
1092:
1084:
1044:
860:
704:
170:
1124:
1060:
1028:
975:
959:
549:
1164:
868:
806:
688:
409:
291:
barred the second trial because there was no "manifest necessity" that another trial be held.
182:
174:
158:
1212:
1068:
935:
884:
130:
1204:
739:
672:
605:
253:
1196:
533:
386:
162:
146:
439:
1241:
1220:
517:
256:
did not prevent a retrial of a defendant, who had previously requested a mistrial.
67:
287:
declared over the objection of the defendant. The appellate court held that the
150:
98:
79:
220:
Stevens took no part in the consideration or decision of the case.
998:
576:
494:
452:
30:
357:
List of United States
Supreme Court cases by the Burger Court
199:
Stewart, joined by Burger, White, Blackmun, Powell, Rehnquist
1263:
United States
Supreme Court cases of the Burger Court
342:
List of United States
Supreme Court cases, volume 424
352:
Lists of United States
Supreme Court cases by volume
104:
United States Court of
Appeals for the Fifth Circuit
927:
844:
825:
774:
715:
632:
589:
224:
211:
203:
195:
190:
119:
109:
92:
87:
59:
49:
42:
23:
244:, 424 U.S. 600 (1976), was a case in which the
1258:United States Double Jeopardy Clause case law
464:
8:
995:
586:
573:
491:
471:
457:
449:
20:
347:List of United States Supreme Court cases
368:
306:Since Justice Story's 1824 opinion in
952:Louisiana ex rel. Francis v. Resweber
54:United States v. Nathan George Dinitz
18:1976 United States Supreme Court case
7:
246:Supreme Court of the United States
36:Supreme Court of the United States
14:
1253:United States Supreme Court cases
697:Bravo-Fernandez v. United States
29:
1248:1976 in United States case law
1:
480:United States Fifth Amendment
901:Puerto Rico v. Sanchez Valle
834:Blockburger v. United States
598:Blockburger v. United States
641:United States v. Randenbush
215:Brennan, joined by Marshall
1279:
1189:J. D. B. v. North Carolina
1117:Dickerson v. United States
526:Wong Wing v. United States
1101:Mitchell v. United States
1007:
1001:Self-Incrimination Clause
994:
845:Dual sovereignty doctrine
665:Fong Foo v. United States
590:Meaning of "same offense"
585:
572:
542:United States v. Moreland
504:
490:
229:
219:
124:
114:
28:
1109:United States v. Hubbell
968:North Carolina v. Pearce
917:Denezpi v. United States
877:United States v. Wheeler
312:, of whether, under the
265:permitted him to appear
1157:Corley v. United States
1149:United States v. Patane
1013:Curcio v. United States
909:Gamble v. United States
799:United States v. Dinitz
732:Ludwig v. Massachusetts
724:United States v. Wilson
657:Burton v. United States
558:United States v. Cotton
376:United States v. Dinitz
241:United States v. Dinitz
43:Argued December 2, 1975
24:United States v. Dinitz
1133:Yarborough v. Alvarado
853:United States v. Lanza
783:United States v. Perez
764:Smith v. United States
756:United States v. Dixon
748:United States v. Felix
681:Burks v. United States
622:United States v. Dixon
614:United States v. Felix
579:Double Jeopardy Clause
423:United States v. Perez
399:Green v. United States
326:Double Jeopardy Clause
314:Double Jeopardy Clause
309:United States v. Perez
289:Double Jeopardy Clause
284:Double Jeopardy Clause
139:William J. Brennan Jr.
1181:Berghuis v. Thompkins
1021:Griffin v. California
893:United States v. Lara
791:United States v. Jorn
649:Ball v. United States
510:Hurtado v. California
295:Analysis of the Court
250:U.S. Const., Amend. V
231:U.S. Const., Amend. V
45:Decided March 8, 1976
1077:Doe v. United States
944:Palko v. Connecticut
815:Blueford v. Arkansas
248:determined that the
1173:Maryland v. Shatzer
1141:Missouri v. Seibert
1093:McNeil v. Wisconsin
1085:Illinois v. Perkins
1045:Williams v. Florida
861:Bartkus v. Illinois
826:Multiple punishment
705:McElrath v. Georgia
252:protection against
171:Lewis F. Powell Jr.
78:96 S. Ct. 1075; 47
1125:Chavez v. Martinez
1061:Edwards v. Arizona
1053:Michigan v. Tucker
1029:Miranda v. Arizona
976:Benton v. Maryland
960:Baxstrom v. Herold
550:Beck v. Washington
483:criminal procedure
318:manifest necessity
278:Procedural history
135:Associate Justices
1235:
1234:
1231:
1230:
1165:Florida v. Powell
1037:Boulden v. Holman
990:
989:
986:
985:
869:Waller v. Florida
807:Oregon v. Kennedy
689:Evans v. Michigan
568:
567:
237:
236:
175:William Rehnquist
159:Thurgood Marshall
1270:
1213:Salinas v. Texas
1069:Oregon v. Elstad
996:
936:Ex parte Bigelow
885:Heath v. Alabama
716:After conviction
587:
574:
492:
473:
466:
459:
450:
443:
419:
413:
396:
390:
373:
131:Warren E. Burger
120:Court membership
33:
32:
21:
1278:
1277:
1273:
1272:
1271:
1269:
1268:
1267:
1238:
1237:
1236:
1227:
1205:Howes v. Fields
1003:
982:
923:
840:
821:
770:
740:Grady v. Corbin
711:
673:Ashe v. Swenson
633:After acquittal
628:
606:Grady v. Corbin
581:
564:
500:
486:
477:
447:
446:
420:
416:
397:
393:
374:
370:
365:
338:
297:
280:
262:
254:double jeopardy
183:John P. Stevens
173:
161:
149:
83:
44:
38:
19:
12:
11:
5:
1276:
1274:
1266:
1265:
1260:
1255:
1250:
1240:
1239:
1233:
1232:
1229:
1228:
1226:
1225:
1217:
1209:
1201:
1197:Bobby v. Dixon
1193:
1185:
1177:
1169:
1161:
1153:
1145:
1137:
1129:
1121:
1113:
1105:
1097:
1089:
1081:
1073:
1065:
1057:
1049:
1041:
1033:
1025:
1017:
1008:
1005:
1004:
999:
992:
991:
988:
987:
984:
983:
981:
980:
972:
964:
956:
948:
940:
931:
929:
925:
924:
922:
921:
913:
905:
897:
889:
881:
873:
865:
857:
848:
846:
842:
841:
839:
838:
829:
827:
823:
822:
820:
819:
811:
803:
795:
787:
778:
776:
775:After mistrial
772:
771:
769:
768:
760:
752:
744:
736:
728:
719:
717:
713:
712:
710:
709:
701:
693:
685:
677:
669:
661:
653:
645:
636:
634:
630:
629:
627:
626:
618:
610:
602:
593:
591:
583:
582:
577:
570:
569:
566:
565:
563:
562:
554:
546:
538:
534:Maxwell v. Dow
530:
522:
514:
505:
502:
501:
495:
488:
487:
478:
476:
475:
468:
461:
453:
445:
444:
414:
391:
367:
366:
364:
361:
360:
359:
354:
349:
344:
337:
334:
296:
293:
279:
276:
261:
258:
235:
234:
227:
226:
222:
221:
217:
216:
213:
209:
208:
205:
201:
200:
197:
193:
192:
188:
187:
186:
185:
163:Harry Blackmun
147:Potter Stewart
136:
133:
128:
122:
121:
117:
116:
112:
111:
107:
106:
94:
90:
89:
85:
84:
77:
61:
57:
56:
51:
50:Full case name
47:
46:
40:
39:
34:
26:
25:
17:
13:
10:
9:
6:
4:
3:
2:
1275:
1264:
1261:
1259:
1256:
1254:
1251:
1249:
1246:
1245:
1243:
1223:
1222:
1221:Vega v. Tekoh
1218:
1215:
1214:
1210:
1207:
1206:
1202:
1199:
1198:
1194:
1191:
1190:
1186:
1183:
1182:
1178:
1175:
1174:
1170:
1167:
1166:
1162:
1159:
1158:
1154:
1151:
1150:
1146:
1143:
1142:
1138:
1135:
1134:
1130:
1127:
1126:
1122:
1119:
1118:
1114:
1111:
1110:
1106:
1103:
1102:
1098:
1095:
1094:
1090:
1087:
1086:
1082:
1079:
1078:
1074:
1071:
1070:
1066:
1063:
1062:
1058:
1055:
1054:
1050:
1047:
1046:
1042:
1039:
1038:
1034:
1031:
1030:
1026:
1023:
1022:
1018:
1015:
1014:
1010:
1009:
1006:
1002:
997:
993:
978:
977:
973:
970:
969:
965:
962:
961:
957:
954:
953:
949:
946:
945:
941:
938:
937:
933:
932:
930:
926:
919:
918:
914:
911:
910:
906:
903:
902:
898:
895:
894:
890:
887:
886:
882:
879:
878:
874:
871:
870:
866:
863:
862:
858:
855:
854:
850:
849:
847:
843:
836:
835:
831:
830:
828:
824:
817:
816:
812:
809:
808:
804:
801:
800:
796:
793:
792:
788:
785:
784:
780:
779:
777:
773:
766:
765:
761:
758:
757:
753:
750:
749:
745:
742:
741:
737:
734:
733:
729:
726:
725:
721:
720:
718:
714:
707:
706:
702:
699:
698:
694:
691:
690:
686:
683:
682:
678:
675:
674:
670:
667:
666:
662:
659:
658:
654:
651:
650:
646:
643:
642:
638:
637:
635:
631:
624:
623:
619:
616:
615:
611:
608:
607:
603:
600:
599:
595:
594:
592:
588:
584:
580:
575:
571:
560:
559:
555:
552:
551:
547:
544:
543:
539:
536:
535:
531:
528:
527:
523:
520:
519:
518:Ex parte Bain
515:
512:
511:
507:
506:
503:
498:
493:
489:
484:
481:
474:
469:
467:
462:
460:
455:
454:
451:
441:
437:
433:
429:
425:
424:
418:
415:
411:
408:
404:
400:
395:
392:
388:
385:
381:
377:
372:
369:
362:
358:
355:
353:
350:
348:
345:
343:
340:
339:
335:
333:
330:
327:
322:
319:
315:
311:
310:
304:
301:
294:
292:
290:
285:
277:
275:
272:
268:
259:
257:
255:
251:
247:
243:
242:
232:
228:
223:
218:
214:
210:
206:
202:
198:
194:
191:Case opinions
189:
184:
180:
176:
172:
168:
164:
160:
156:
152:
148:
144:
140:
137:
134:
132:
129:
127:Chief Justice
126:
125:
123:
118:
113:
108:
105:
101:
100:
95:
91:
86:
81:
75:
74:
69:
66:
62:
58:
55:
52:
48:
41:
37:
27:
22:
16:
1219:
1211:
1203:
1195:
1187:
1179:
1171:
1163:
1155:
1147:
1139:
1131:
1123:
1115:
1107:
1099:
1091:
1083:
1075:
1067:
1059:
1051:
1043:
1035:
1027:
1019:
1011:
974:
966:
958:
950:
942:
934:
915:
907:
899:
891:
883:
875:
867:
859:
851:
832:
813:
805:
798:
797:
789:
781:
762:
754:
746:
738:
730:
722:
703:
695:
687:
679:
671:
663:
655:
647:
639:
620:
612:
604:
596:
556:
548:
540:
532:
524:
516:
508:
442: (1824).
421:
417:
412: (1951).
398:
394:
389: (1976).
375:
371:
331:
323:
317:
307:
305:
302:
298:
281:
270:
267:pro hac vice
266:
263:
240:
239:
238:
225:Laws applied
178:
166:
154:
142:
97:
88:Case history
71:
53:
15:
410:184, 187-88
204:Concurrence
151:Byron White
96:On Writ of
1242:Categories
497:Grand Jury
363:References
99:certiorari
80:L. Ed. 2d
60:Citations
485:case law
336:See also
196:Majority
212:Dissent
110:Holding
102:to the
1224:(2022)
1216:(2013)
1208:(2012)
1200:(2011)
1192:(2011)
1184:(2010)
1176:(2010)
1168:(2010)
1160:(2009)
1152:(2004)
1144:(2004)
1136:(2004)
1128:(2003)
1120:(2000)
1112:(2000)
1104:(1999)
1096:(1991)
1088:(1990)
1080:(1988)
1072:(1985)
1064:(1981)
1056:(1974)
1048:(1970)
1040:(1969)
1032:(1966)
1024:(1965)
1016:(1957)
979:(1969)
971:(1969)
963:(1966)
955:(1947)
947:(1937)
939:(1885)
920:(2022)
912:(2019)
904:(2016)
896:(2004)
888:(1985)
880:(1978)
872:(1970)
864:(1959)
856:(1922)
837:(1932)
818:(2012)
810:(1982)
802:(1976)
794:(1971)
786:(1824)
767:(2023)
759:(1993)
751:(1992)
743:(1990)
735:(1976)
727:(1833)
708:(2024)
700:(2016)
692:(2013)
684:(1978)
676:(1970)
668:(1962)
660:(1906)
652:(1896)
644:(1834)
625:(1993)
617:(1992)
609:(1990)
601:(1932)
561:(2002)
553:(1962)
545:(1922)
537:(1900)
529:(1896)
521:(1887)
513:(1884)
499:Clause
438:)
436:Wheat.
426:,
401:,
378:,
207:Burger
181:
179:·
177:
169:
167:·
165:
157:
155:·
153:
145:
143:·
141:
928:Other
430:
405:
382:
260:Facts
93:Prior
432:U.S.
407:U.S.
384:U.S.
324:The
73:more
65:U.S.
63:424
440:579
434:(9
403:355
387:600
380:424
271:Id.
82:267
68:600
1244::
428:22
472:e
465:t
458:v
233:,
76:)
70:(
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.