Document: 434 U.S. 497 98 S.Ct. 824 54 L.Ed.2d 717 ARIZONA, Richard Boykin, Sheriff, Pima County, Petitioner,v.George WASHINGTON, Jr. No. 76-1168. Argued Oct. 31, 1977. Decided Feb. 21, 1978. Syllabus After respondent was found guilty of murder, the Arizona trial court granted a new because prosecution had withheld exculpatory evidence from defense. At beginning trial, judge, after extended argument, prosecutor's motion for mistrial predicated on improper and prejudicial comment during defense counsel's opening statement that been hidden at first but judge did not expressly find there "manifest necessity" or state he considered alternative solutions. The Supreme Court refused to review ruling, sought writ habeas corpus in Federal District Court. While agreeing improper, held could be placed further jeopardy failed mistrial. Appeals affirmed. Held: 1. Although extent possible juror bias cannot measured some judges might have proceeded with giving jury appropriate cautionary instructions, nevertheless overriding interest evenhanded administration justice requires highest degree respect accorded judge's decision declare based his assessment impact statement. Pp. 503-514. 2. record supports conclusion exercised "sound discretion" declaring mistrial, it appearing acted responsibly deliberately careful consideration respondent's having concluded single proceeding, therefore order is supported by "high degree" necessity required case this kind. 514-516. 3. Since provides sufficient justification ruling subject collateral attack federal simply make an explicit finding would avoid valid double plea articulate all factors informed deliberate exercise discretion. 516-517. 546 F.2d 829, reversed. Stephen D. Neely, Tucson, Ariz., petitioner. Ed P. Bolding, respondent. Mr. Justice STEVENS delivered opinion 1 An In subsequent Double Jeopardy Clause protected defendant another trial. Ninth Circuit affirmed.1 questions presented are whether reflects kind "necessity" will jeopardy, if so, must allowed fully explain reasons ruling. 2 * 1971 murdering hotel night clerk. 1973, Superior ordered prosecutor affirmed unpublished opinion. 3 Respondent's second began January 1975. During voir dire examination prospective jurors, made reference fact witnesses whose testimony jurors hear testified proceedings four years earlier.2 Defense counsel told "that [respondent] last trial." statement, point more forcefully: 4 "You notwithstanding we May matter, hid those statements didn't give lawyer George saying man Spanish speaking, all, them. 5 suppressed case. You purposely withheld. misconduct County Attorney time evidence, case." App. 180-181, 184. 6 were completed, moved colloquy argument motion, expressed concerning specifically Court, irrelevant issue guilt innocence inadmissible. asked opportunity "to law" support belief admissible.3 stated withhold admissibility denied Two then testified. 7 following morning prosecu renewed motion. Fortified evening's research, argued no theory which basis brought attention jury, prejudice repaired any necessity." still prepared authority supporting admissible.4 He invited witnesses' earlier avoided curative instructions. concern about possibility erroneous preclude trial.5 8 Ultimately stating upon remarks mistrial; nor solutions none adequate. ruling.6 9 Respondent filed petition United States Arizona, alleging violate Clause. reviewing transcript hearing arguments counsel, Judge noted canvassed alternatives view before granting manifest exists it."7 Because contained such finding, himself, writ.8 agreed State, however, improper. 10 also characterized as because, absent alternatives,9 unwilling infer prevented arriving fair impartial verdict.10 concurring opinion, two that, while question argued, most concerned They "absent findings existed, . [was] quite grant mistria impropriety conduct established without reaching could, nevertheless, F.2d, 833. 11 We persuaded applied inappropriate standard rulings kind, attached undue significance form reverse. II 12 A State may put twice same offense. Benton v. Maryland, 395 784, 89 2056, 23 707. constitutional protection against unequivocally prohibits acquittal. public finality criminal judgments so strong acquitted retried even though "the acquittal egregiously foundation." See Fong Foo States, 369 141, 143, 82 671, 672, 629. If accused has confirmed final judgment, Constitution conclusively presumes unfair. 13 attaches judgment becomes final, embraces defendant's "valued right completed particular tribunal."11 why right" merits worthy repetition. Even grossly It increases financial emotional burden accused,12 prolongs period stigmatized unresolved accusation wrongdoing,13 enhance risk innocent convicted.14 danger unfairness whenever aborted completed.15 Consequently, general rule, entitled one, only require stand 14 Unlike situation ended conviction, retrial automatically barred when proceeding terminated finally resolving charges accused. variety circumstances necessary discharge concluded, do invariably create accused, valued tribunal sometimes subordinate affording one full present jury.16 Yet importance right, frustrated shoulder justifying bar. His heavy one. demonstrate declared over objection defendant. 15 words appropriately characterize magnitude burden.17 For reason Story's classic formulation test18 quoted again provide guidance wide cases.19 Nevertheless, describe can mechanically problem confronting judge.20 Indeed, key word interpreted literally; instead, contrary teaching Webster, assume degrees concluding appropriate.21 16 reached answered easily kinds cases than others. extreme requests buttress weaknesses evidence. English served Stuart monarchs exercising power appeared Crown's insufficient convict,22 prohibition evolved country plainly intended condemn "abhorrent" practice.23 As Dinitz, 424 600, 611, 96 1075, 1081, 47 267: 17 "The does protect governmental actions provoke thereby defendants substantial burdens imposed multiple prosecutions. bars retrials where 'bad-faith prosecutor' threatens '[h]arassment successive prosecutions declaration afford favorable convict' defendant." 18 Thus, strictest scrutiny unavailability critical evidence,24 believe using superior resources harass achieve tactical advantage accused.25 19 other premised unable reach verdict, long proper mistrial.26 jury's inability agree establishes reasonable doubt guilt, acquittal, uniformly rejected country. Instead, exception, courts genuinely deadlocked submit This rule accords recognition society's complete convict who violated its laws. 20 Moreover, especially compelling allowing broad discretion deciding justifies jury. On hand, discharges deliberations produce deprived tribunal." But fails verdict protracted exhausting deliberations, significant result pressures inherent rather jurors. appellate views differently latter, cognizant serious societal consequences employ coercive means break apparent deadlock. Such frustrate just judgments.27 considers great deference court.28 21 along spectrum problems warrant vary their amenability scrutiny, difficulty led falls area determination special respect. 22 insists prosecutorial misconduct29 admissible matter law, proper, regard foreclosed failure proffer precedent supportive contention30 court's interpretation own buttressed consistent Appeals. Cf. Bishop Wood, 426 341, 346-347, 2074, 2078-2079, 48 684. start premise affected impartiality recognize measured, correct believing strict, literal sense, "necessary." accord evaluation likelihood comment. 24 course involving conclusion. Simmons 142 148, 171, 35 L.Ed. 968, involved caused newspaper story describing letter written denying charge third party acquainted Without determ ning truth falsity charge, examining ascertain what influence them, " 'impossible future true independence freedom action part each accused.' Id., 150, S.Ct., 171. affirmed, holding justified publication impossible act requisite between parties." 155, 172. 25 Thompson 155 271, 279, 73, 76, 39 146, revealed grand indicted heard evidence—and perhaps less—than since actual defendant, strictly There doubt, validity 26 unquestionably tends tribunal. risk, often individual situation,31 entire panel tainted. course, instruct disregard cases, discipline remove him 267. Those actions, necessarily created argument. Unless unscrupulous unfair advantage, cases. orderly, procedure impaired deterred disagreed barred. adoption stringent area, therefore, seriously impede performance "duty, integrity take prompt affirmative stop professional misconduct." 612, 1082.32 27 institutional considerations militating favor bias.33 seen examination. familiar background listened tone observed reaction short, far "conversant relevant determination" possibly be. Wade Hunter, 336 684, 687, 69 834, 836, 93 974. III 28 Our not, end inquiry. earlier, constitutionally inevitably decision. "must always temper abort considering being able, once conclude confrontation society through favorably disposed fate." Jorn, 400 U.S., 486, 91 558 (Harlan, J.). ensure adequately protected, obligation satisfy themselves Story, 29 acts irrationally irresponsibly, cf. supra; see Illinois Somerville, 410 469, 1072, condoned. our indicates case.34 aired highly best position assess. precipitately response request contrary, evincing gave both positions propriety deliberately, proceeding. handling sensitive kind.35 Neither decided tainted bias;36 these circumstances, public's trials designed judgements"37 prevail impaneled. IV 30 One consideration. absence appears determinative regarded omission critical.38 they too much. state-court completely render defective. 31 Review decision, facilitated explanation No how desirable procedural assistance be, mandated this. Cupp Naughten, 414 94 396, 400, 38 368. mis rial disclosed record, includes extensive prior discretion.39 32 Reversed. 33 BLACKMUN concurs result. 34 WHITE, dissenting. I express legal under is, itself error foreclosing Court's Townsend Sain, 372 293, 83 745, 770 (1963), contrary. There, scale exposition approach followed determining should issued prisoner, addressed making challenged acted. coequal responsibilities law think district may, ordinary articulation, properly trier standards facts, suspect incorrect applied." 314-315, 758. silent committed error; mere enough relief. 36 Appeals, well relief determine use sufficiently indicated something beyond silence and, said "normally inclined uphold," least "clear abuse discretion," vulnerable. undertake here instance. Rather, vacate direct remand initial standard, issue. disagreement disposition leads me dissent. 37 MARSHALL, whom BRENNAN joins, today holds respondent, mist ial vehement objection, prohibited To result, my Brethren assumes nowhere record. crucial My majority narrow concur "embraces 'valued tribunal,' "increases wrongdoing, convicted." Ante, 503-504 (footnotes omitted). reasons, objections, permissible termination "heavy" demonstrating necessity. 505-506. Nor quarrel proposition leave secure ends justice. 510, 513-514.1 40 Where ways assumption "assessment argument," ante, 514, need implied below found,2 face "ends justice" fulfilled. Perez, Wheat. 579, 580, 165 (1824). 511. occupied page lengthy Despite vigorously interrupted numerous points assert various objections,3 formed visibly obvious uttered, hard waited until finished luncheon recess known. 41 distance precise prejudiced set forth above suggest minimal cure less drastic alternatives.4 example, instructed mention issues consider exhibits admitted stand.5 Were instructions alone suffice taint, questioned prejudice. Given anticipated length (almost weeks),6 unlikely erred dissipated begin. implicit mistrial.7 42 concedes, 501, remarks; exploration solution nor, indeed, indication aware dictates Perez doctrine. Over days thrust comments admitting into adverted statement.8 tenor throughout—including mistrial9—suggests admissibility.10 43 evidentiary conscientious deliberate. infers care governing permissibility mistrials, impliedly, expressly, deliberation dealt issue, highlights address inquiry: abrogation completing 470, 547, 557, 543 (1971) (plurality Harlan, J.); 689, 837, 974 (1949), way charges. 44 propose justify objections. nature "would reversal [of conviction] appeal certainty," 458, 464, 1066, 1070, 425 (1973), mistrial.11 What doctrine require, view, clear either meaningful practical scrupulously available wanting proceedings. supra, 485, 557; 478-479, 1077-1078 (MARSHALL, J., dissenting). here, demonstrated above, neither. 45 "plain obvious," Wheat., apparent. chaos conducting welter administrative concerns occupy mind easy overlook factor rendering requirement given efficacy decisions partly adequate, criteria. Of relevance moreover, facilitate review, avoiding speculate terminate trial.12 These force ground resulting error. uniquely situated evaluate seriousness prejudice, 513-514, contemporaneously objection. hold clearly indicate choice among alternatives.13 46 Had explored incurable necessity," different majority's reasoning result.14 ambiguous finding—and indeed manifest-necessity leaves open states granted, reading inconsistent principle. affirm 829 (1977). discharging custody stayed pending completion review. context asking venire able credit witness inconsistencies "THE COURT: conceive whatsoever. "MR. BOLDING: I'll really try additional work, your Honor, it. admissible. It's corroborative hear. I'm afraid, don't know it, we're getting trying Attorney's office office, conduct, whatever case, simply, am going allow goes very sorely tempted State's time. Well that's—I be—sorry happens tells now examine furnish you says yes, come in, abide Honor. working like reserve outside just, it's credible It's, thinking, know, off top head experts. truly certainly some, type testimony, evidence." 209-210. Later, impeachment theory: "I you're prove impeach every witness, that's me." 217-218. worked stage yet bring 243. Apparently authority. "[Prosecutor:] cure, taking wrong, walks, that. And Butler." 253. "special action"—a common-law mandamus prohibition, 17A Ariz.Rev.Stat.Ann., Rules Procedure Special Actions, Rule (1973)—and corpus. dismiss quash information. Petitioner raise adequacy exhaustion remedies. 129. simple effect sufficed defeat claim. 130-140. Kilkenny stated: "In abuse, normally uphold discretionary orders nature. usual complained-of event, specific findings. Under accompanied longer lightly aside." 832. seems "observed event" patiently "heard counsel." taken step reviewed exacting abuse-of-discretion standard. originally released, "[W]e decline imply verdict." 29-30. subsequently amended delete "completely" sentence. written, probability certainty suffice. description Harlan plurality 484, 466, 1071, 425, formulated Black sentence identifies larger judgment: "What show instances subordinated judgments." Ibid. "Reprosecution unnecessarily obviously subjects personal strain insecurity regardless motivation underlying action." 483, 556. Green 355 184, 187-188, 78 221, 223, 199: idea, deeply ingrained Anglo-American system jurisprudence, repeated attempts alleged offense, subjecting embarrassment, expense ordeal enhancing guilty." (Emphasis added.) Carsey 129 U.S.App.D.C. 205, 208-209, 392 810, 813-814 (1967), Leventhal described subtle changes initially occur prosecutions: "[T]he Government came drop impressions Thus person appellant deceased together, testifying evening newlyweds honeymoon, unfriendly spoken, up them 'firm,' harsh 'cross.' "We note police officer readily acquiesced 'hung jury' 'hysterical,' later characterization. shift, dramatic, inconsequential appellant's condition officer." n. 13, supra. 471, 1073: undertaken, fate determined impaneled weighty lack demonstrable invocation bar important countervailing judicial administration." announcing 479-480, 554, explained rigid application "particular tribunal" principle unacceptable: "[A] complicated affair manage. [ t is] mechanical prohibiting compel consent high price pay added assurance security harassment provide." Whether phrase "evident Winsor Queen, L.R. Q.B. 289, 305 (1866) (Cockburn, C. J.), "imperious Downum 734, 736, 1033, 1034, 100, used, meaning apparently same. think, nature, invested Courts whenever, consideration, act, otherwise defeated. sound subject; define interfere. sure, ought used greatest caution, urgent plain causes. But, discharge; faithful, sound, discretion, rests, this, responsibility Judges, oaths office." 165. See, e. g., (court-martial military necessity); 968 (possible bias); supra (hung jury). 462, 1069, "formulation, consistently adhered decisions, abjures formula varying unique situations arising recognized "hung jury" context: "This literally command confinement till death agree, consequence exception introduced practice Blackstone 'except evident necessity.' "But rise doubts, equivocal word, irresistible compulsion need. interested objecting disputed stricter sense word. dispute source main raised error, substance decide apply facts reco d. lawful circumstances. Then ascertained. comparison; nearer precision wider denoted 390, 394. E. Whitebread, How.St.Tr. 311 (1679). Queen Charlesworth, B. & S. 460, 500, 121 Eng.Rep. 786, 801 (Q.B.1861); Friedland, 13-14, 21-25 (1969); Sigler, 87 Douglas, Almanac Liberty 143 (1954). reaction, developed England except supra,, 304-305. However, if, discharged Crown testify, rule. 390; ; 22-23. "[I]n reigns latter sovereigns family, prevailed, purpose better day; benefit crown only; abhorrent safety receive countenance James II, Revolution, examination, laid down Lord Coke revived ." Garrigues, N.C. 188, 189, [241] (1795). If, proceeds reason, 100. "forbids run Note, Twice Jeopardy, 75 Yale L.J. 262, 287-288 (1965). Douglas 1034: "Harassment examples attaches." Yet, noted, "those mark limits guarantee." implicated presence overreaching. "right go valued, independent threat bad-faith prosecutor, jury." 557. discussion Part III, infra. 735-736, 1033-1034. recent origin: ourselves, parties , satisfied agree; hope shrink course; for, coerce suffering, expose conviction minds produced suffering body." S., 503-504, Eng.Rep., 802. 579; Logan 144 263, 617, 429; Moss Glenn, 189 506, 851, 921; Keerl Montana, 213 135, 53 734; Dreyer Illinois, 187 71, 28, 79. rationale "hung" assess continues reveals entrusted him, disappears. unrelated purports close appropriate. Gordy, 526 631 (CA5 1976). regarding hand Brady (Brady 373 83, 1194, 215) material inadvertent. matter. accept analysis characterization disclose misconduct. relies Burruell, Ariz. 37, 401 P.2d 733 (1965), admissibility. Tr. Oral Arg. 30. stands well-accepted impeached tending undoubtedly nothing Burruell suppression suggestion bias, replace alternate. Chief BURGER emphasized scope legitimate statement: "It presented, easier understand follow, relate parts whole; occasion proof relates elements fundamentally opposing attorney, standing prestige court, susceptible 1082. identification according generally prisoner's challenge Clause, reviews bias. brief previous Later obtained State. concern, conducted inquiry knew pening followed, jurors' conjecture; explicitly showing Following insisted purposes; although offer novel proposition, appreciate "find Supra, 500 remarked admission immediately injection 499-500, 3, precipitately. caution reserved hasty despite acting out interests improvident 225, day sides contended resulted references cured instructions; inadequate taint. considerations, determinative, add First, crowded calendars throughout Nation impose constant pressure finish business hand. Generally, promptly possible, frequently parallels Second, attempt harm accompanies retrial. McNeal Hollowell, 481 1145, 1147 1973). Morris, Fed.Cas.No. 15,815, p. 1323 (C.C.Mass.1851), Curtis sworn, late pointed neither "can vested corrupt juror, fit sit 1328. 837. nn. 7-10 accompanying text, unwarranted. Shortly first, withholding "poisoning panel." addition, offered short eliminate Finally, awareness grave neglected central essentially unremarkable. truism aside unless "clearly erroneous," credibility witnesses. Fed.Rule Civ.Proc. 52(a); Zenith Radio Corp. Hazeltine Research, Inc., 123, 1562, 1576, (1969). sort primarily factual prejudiced. Contrary implication, 502 8-9, relating dispositive. respective conclusions independently verdict," 832; 128-129 (District instruction). "[t]he court" "[i]n nature." 173, 176, 178, 182, 183. search necessity, permit 608, 1080, 267 (1976), quoting 556, mean errors, Bruton 391 129, 88 1620, 1624, 476 (1968), Krulewitch 440, 453, 716, 723, 790 (1949) (Jackson, concurring), particularly shown harmless sustained, Chapman California, 386 18, 21-24, 824, 826-828, 705 (1967). legion convictions upheld exposure past dispel Bloom, 538 704, 710 1976); id. 711 (Tuttle, concurring); Plante, 472 831-832 (CA1), cert. denied, 411 950, 1932, (1973); Roland, 449 1281 1971); Driver 441 276 Beasley 406, 218 366 (1954), 349 907, 584, 99 1243 (1955). Hoffman, 415 14, (CA7), 396 958, 90 431, 423 (1969) (prosecutor's closing referring "liar, crook, wheeler dealer" error). surely prosecution. Voir Dire Defendant's Counsel 22. respect, instant differs markedly 146 (1894), discussed 512. discovery petit indicting announced "[if it] gentlemen, left Record 637, O.T. 1893, 20. objected juror's participation, arguing jeopardy. correct, remained 21-22. That violating repeatedly theories 204, 209, 211, 217, 248, refer necessity"; propounded; consciousness side 4, "Based granted." 271-272. "quite 833 (Merrill, concurring). three aspects 514-515, 34, 517 39. improvidently namely, tried again. true, suggests anything question. minuscule portion side's elicited court. notes panel" allay knowledge dire, questioning purposes: deliberations. Dire, 35. prejudice—recognized separate None portions instruction, basis, determination. 512, 7, necessitates present, thereon, prompts 477-483, 1076-1080, (1973) setting occasion, contribute development body rules, precedents, principles useful providing courts. ex rel. Johnson Chairman N. Y. Bd. Parole, 925, 928-934 (CA2), vacated moot, 419 1015, 95 488, 289 (1974). unnecessary trials, required. observe contexts decisionmakers adverse statutorily individual. Morrissey Brewer, 408 489, 92 2593, 2604, 484 (1972); Goldberg Kelly, 397 254, 1011, 1022, 287 (1970). (1891), 149-150, 171-172. "no [other] way" respond

Category: 0