PER CURIAM.
Affirmed. Appellant's challenges to his 1972 conviction are untimely and successive. He also contends that the trial court lacked subject matter jurisdiction to try him a second time without first determining the manifest necessity of declaring a mistrial in the first prosecution. This is not an issue of subject matter jurisdiction but of double jeopardy, which was not violated because the new trial was the result of a hung jury in the first trial...
Let's get started
Welcome to the leading source of independent legal reporting
Sign on now to see your case.
Or view more than 10 million decisions and orders.
- Updated daily.
- Uncompromising quality.
- Complete, Accurate, Current.
