Court Opinion

ID: 9623416
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-22 06:32:57.577987+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T09:02:12.631398
License: Public Domain

TANZER, J.,
concurring.
I concur in the opinion of the majority in all respects except one. In regard to the motion for mistrial, I do not reach the question of discretion. Rather, I concur in the last paragraph of that portion of the opinion which holds that the motion for mistrial was properly denied because there was no timely objection to the statements which were the bases of the subsequent motion for mistrial. A purpose of prompt objection is to preclude the necessity of a mistrial. One who waits to object accepts the objectionable and a tardy motion for a mistrial may properly be denied regardless of whether the objectionable matter is prejudicial.