In deciding whether the trial court abused its discretion, we are free to consider the factors listed in Whitfield , but we do not engage in de novo review. Haywood , supra . A mistrial should be granted only for an irregularity that is prejudicial to the rights of the defendant, and impairs his ability to get a fair trial. B Having determined the proper standard of review, we must now decide whether the trial court abused its discretion in refusing to grant a mistrial. We conclude that it did not.
Defendant correctly argues that testimony concerning the polygraph was inadmissible.
However, the inadvertent, unsolicited mention by a witness that a polygraph was administered does not necessarily require a mistrial. Upon considering these factors, we find that the circumstances here do not indicate that the trial court abused its discretion when it denied defendant's motion for a mistrial. Defendant did object and receive a cautionary instruction, a fact that weighs in favor of granting mistrial. The reference to the polygraph, however, was inadvertent. The rest of the information was volunteered and could not have been anticipated.