BROCK v. STATE

No. 38S02-1101-CR-8.

955 N.E.2d 195 (2011)

Nathan BROCK, Appellant (Defendant below), v. STATE of Indiana, Appellee (Plaintiff below).

Supreme Court of Indiana.

October 18, 2011.


Attorney(s) appearing for the Case

Dale W. Arnett , Winchester, IN, Attorney for Appellant.

Gregory F. Zoeller , Attorney General of Indiana, Henry Flores, Jr. , Ellen H. Meilaender , Deputy Attorney General, Indianapolis, IN, Attorneys for Appellee.


SULLIVAN, Justice.

The defendant's first trial ended in a mistrial due to improper prejudicial comments made by defense counsel during closing argument. We hold that, although the defendant did not consent to the mistrial, his second trial did not violate the Double Jeopardy Clause of the Fifth Amendment because the trial court did not abuse its discretion in concluding that a mistrial was justified by manifest necessity.

Background

The defendant...

Let's get started

Leagle.com

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.

Listed below are the cases that are cited in this Featured Case. Click the citation to see the full text of the cited case. Citations are also linked in the body of the Featured Case.

Cited Cases

  • No Cases Found

Listed below are those cases in which this Featured Case is cited. Click on the case name to see the full text of the citing case.

Citing Cases