Mistrials
Mistrials are judicial proceedings that are terminated without reaching a final verdict or judgment, often due to serious errors or extraordinary circumstances that impede the trial's progress. A common reason for a mistrial is a hung jury, where jurors cannot unanimously agree on a verdict, necessitating the judge to declare the trial invalid after exhausting all reasonable attempts to reach a conclusion. Other grounds for mistrials can include procedural mishaps, such as lack of jurisdiction or the admission of prejudicial evidence that could influence the jury's decision-making process. In some cases, a mistrial may prevent a defendant from facing a retrial for the same offense due to the principle of double jeopardy, unless the mistrial is deemed necessary under conditions of "manifest necessity," such as emergencies that disrupt the court's ability to proceed. Additionally, inappropriate conduct by attorneys, such as biased remarks, can also lead to a mistrial, reinforcing the legal system's commitment to fairness and justice. Overall, mistrials serve as a mechanism to ensure that legal proceedings uphold the integrity of justice, allowing for a fresh start under more favorable circumstances.
On this Page
Subject Terms
Mistrials
SIGNIFICANCE: Mistrials end judicial proceedings without final decisions or judgments. Their ultimate impact on criminal cases may vary with the reasons for the mistrials.
Mistrials typically involve serious errors, mistakes, or extraordinary events that cannot be corrected within the trials themselves while still allowing the trials to maintain the interest of justice. In declaring a mistrial, a judge nullifies all trial proceedings completed up to that point. No judgment or final order is entered in the case, and in most instances the parties are put back to the positions they held immediately prior to the beginning of the trial.
Mistrials may be declared for a number of reasons, but one of the most common is known as a hung jury—a jury that cannot reach a verdict under the law applicable to the case. To reach a guilty verdict in a criminal case, the jurors must unanimously decide that the government has proven a defendant’s guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. If a single juror disagrees with the other jurors, or if the jurors as a group simply cannot agree, then the judge may declare a mistrial after all reasonable efforts to reach a verdict are exhausted.
Mistrials may also be declared for procedural or substantive legal reasons, such as lack of jurisdiction. If a court determines that it lacks authority over the parties or the subject matter, then an order of mistrial is entered in place of a judgment. Likewise, a mistrial may be declared when some prejudicial error occurs. Such an error would occur if a court were to allow irrelevant evidence to be admitted to trial; when such evidence is found to have a prejudicial effect on the outcome of the trial, then calling a mistrial is proper.
In some criminal cases, mistrials may prevent defendants from facing second trials for the same offenses under the doctrine of double jeopardy . An exception would occur in a situation in which the mistrial arises under the concept of manifest necessity, that is, a sudden and overwhelming emergency beyond the court’s control. For example, manifest necessity might arise when a severe storm or other natural event prevents litigants from reasonably continuing the trial. In such a situation, a mistrial might be declared so that a new trial can be held at a later time, when conditions are more favorable.
In limited instances, the conduct of the parties, or their attorneys, may be grounds for declaring mistrials. One example would be a situation in which a prosecutor makes inappropriate comments during the closing argument. For instance, if the prosecutor were to comment on the race of a defendant when race has no bearing on the crime in question, such comments might create an undue prejudice that would not be cured by the judge’s subsequent instructions to the jury to ignore the remarks. In such an instance, the interest of justice would demand that the court declare a mistrial in order to correct the egregious conditions caused by the inappropriate remarks.
Bibliography
Acker, J. R., and D. C. Brody. Criminal Procedure: A Contemporary Perspective. 2nd ed. Sudbury: Jones, 2004. Print.
Bodenhamer, David J. Fair Trial: Rights of the Accused in American History. New York: Oxford UP, 1997. Print.
Chemerinsky, Erwin, and Laurie L. Levenson. Criminal Procedure: Adjudication. 2nd ed. New York: Wolters, 2013. Print.
Geragos, Mark, and Pat Harris. Mistrial: An Inside Look at How the Criminal Justice System Works . . . and Sometimes Doesn't. New York: Gotham, 2013. Print.
LaFave, Wayne R., Jerold H. Israel, and Nancy J. King. Criminal Procedure. 4th ed. St. Paul: Thomson, 2004. Print.
May, Samuel. "Unexpected Findings and the Impact of Mistrials in Fraud Prosecutions." Association of Certified Fraud Examiners, 12 Dec. 2023, www.acfe.com/fraud-resources/fraud-examiner-archives/fraud-examiner-article?s=unexpected-endings-the-impact-of-mistrials. Accessed 8 July 2024.
Munson, Olivia. "What Is the Meaning of a Mistrial? Unpacking What the Court Term Means for a Defendant." USA Today, www.usatoday.com/story/news/2023/10/26/what-is-a-mistrial/71069139007/. Accessed 8 July 2024.