Opinion ID: 2374146
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 5

Heading: Should the Court have Directed a Mistrial When a Reference was made to a Book Recovered from Appellant which had been submitted to the Federal Bureau of Investigation?

Text: The police recovered from the residence in which appellant had taken up refuge, a blue canvas bag containing, among other things, a book containing phone numbers. At trial one of the detectives, referring to such book, indicated it had been submitted to the F.B.I. Defense counsel moved for a mistrial, which was denied. No further inquiry into the matter occurred. Appellant complains that the reference implied that he had prior contact with the law enforcement officials. To warrant a characterization as prejudicial the testimony must convey to the jury, either expressly or by reasonable implication, the fact of a prior criminal offense. Commonwealth v. Banks, 454 Pa. 401, 411, 311 A.2d 576, 581 (1973); quoted in Commonwealth v. Starks, 484 Pa. 399, 408, 399 A.2d 353, 357 (1979). To conclude [here] that appellant had committed prior crimes from a detective's single statement that [the book was submitted to the F.B. I.], the jury would have to indulge in gross speculation. Accordingly, the trial court did not err in denying this motion for mistrial. Commonwealth v. Riggins, 478 Pa. 222, 231, 386 A.2d 520, 524 (1978).