Brown v. Merola

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• finding that defense counsel’s failure to object to mistrial, and his discussion of defendant’s retrial, amounted to implied consent to court’s sua sponte declaration of mistrial
• finding consent where, after the judge declared a mistrial but before he dismissed the jury, the judge and attorneys held a discussion in which retrial was anticipated and no objections were made to the mistrial
• “Defense counsel did not object to the order of mistrial, despite adequate opportunity to do so.”
• “as a general rule the unavailability of an irreplaceable juror makes a mistrial manifestly necessary”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).