Court Opinion

ID: 9723200
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-26 10:06:00.900589+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T18:24:45.452044
License: Public Domain

Fitzgerald, J.
(concurring). When a defendant consents to a mistrial after jeopardy has attached, ordinarily retrial is not barred. People v Grimmett, 388 Mich 590, 598; 202 NW2d 278 (1972). The difficult question in this case is whether or not defendant consented to the mistrial. Following United States v Dinitz, 424 US 600, 607-609; 96 S Ct 1075; 47 L Ed 2d 267 (1976), the proper inquiry in answering that question is "whether defendant had primary control” over the course to be followed. People v Alvin Johnson, 396 Mich 424, 451; 240 NW2d 729 (1976) (Coleman, J., dissenting). While the totality of the circumstances in Alvin Johnson revealed that defendant Johnson had control in his case, the record in the instant case does not show that the defendant had control.
Since it is not apparent from the record that defendant consented to the mistrial declaration *66and since there was no "manifest necessity” for a mistrial, I concur in reversal.
Coleman and Ryan, JJ., concurred with Fitzgerald, J.
Blair Moody, Jr., J., took no part in the decision of this case.